Sunday, January 26, 2020

Hedgerow Management in Pastoral Landscapes

Hedgerow Management in Pastoral Landscapes Abstract Hedgerows are an important part of the British landscape, providing both food and shelter for a number of taxa. As part of the UK government’s Environmental Stewardship (ES) Scheme, farmers are granted subsidies for, amongst other things, ‘enhanced hedgerow management’. Although hedgerow management under ES is expected to have beneficial effects for taxa such as invertebrates and birds, less is known about the effects ES management will have on small mammal communities. The aim of this study was to investigate whether this ‘enhanced hedgerow management’ is affecting hedgerow characteristics in pastoral landscapes and whether small mammal abundances are increased under ES managed hedgerows. ‘Conservation buffer strips’ (2m+ unimproved grassy margins) were investigated as a possible improvement to ES hedgerow management. Using live trapping methods, I investigated small mammal abundances in ES managed hedgerows compared with non-ES managed hedgerows. Wood mice Apodemus sylvaticus and bank voles Clethrionomys glareolus were the most abundant species, with some captures of field voles Microtus agrestis and common shrews Sorex araneus. Small mammal abundances were increased in ES managed hedgerows, however, the presence of a ‘conservation buffer strip’ was more significant in increasing small mammal densities. ES management showed no definite effect on the hedgerows’ characteristics. Introduction Agricultural intensification since the 1940s has led to widespread and significant reductions in the biodiversity of many agricultural areas. This drive for greater yields has been linked with the population decreases seen in many species of farmland specialists and non-specialists who often inhabit farmland (Robinson and Sutherland, 2002). Farmland habitats can be categorised into non-linear habitats such as set-aside, cropped fields and woodland areas, and linear habitats, generally field boundaries, such as ditches, banks, streams and hedgerows. These field boundaries remain relatively undisturbed areas and are therefore significant wildlife corridors within otherwise inhospitable agricultural landscapes (Tew, 1994). Although there continued to be a reduction in total area of hedgerows within the UK during the 80s and early 90s, the last decade has seen small increases in the area of hedgerow as their conservation significance became more documented (Barr and Gillespie, 2000). This increase in the number of hedgerows has been driven by government backed grants. Countryside Steward (CS), set up in 1991 encouraged selected farmers to enhance and conserve the wildlife within their farms, a large part of this involved the laying of new hedgerows. The CS schemes have now been superseded by the Environmental Stewardship Schemes. More recently, hedgerow grant pilot schemes have been set up in a number of regions to encourage landowners, both farmers and non-farmers to manage their hedgerows more effectively; these grants are available to pay for gapping up, hedge laying or coppicing. Small mammals in pastoral land are largely confined to hedgerows or other non-crop features and are therefore particularly vulnerable to intensification (Bates and Harris, 2009). Small mammal species constitute the main prey biomass for a number of species of mammals and birds, and therefore small mammal abundance directly influences the abundance and diversity of predator species contributing to the complexity of local food webs (Korpimaki and Norrdahl, 1991). There remains some debate on the importance of linear habitats for small mammals, with some suggesting that they cannot support viable populations, that those found in hedgerows are ‘sink’ populations (Tattersall et al. 2004). However, there is evidence that small mammal abundance and diversity does not depend on the linear or non-linear character of the habitat and that linear habitats can support viable populations (Gelling et al. 2007). Thus, in large expanses of uninhabitable grassland, field boundary hedgerows are of great importance for maintaining small mammal populations in an agricultural landscape, but differing farming practices can lead to a huge variety in the quality of these habitats As the emphasis of farming has shifted there have been a number of agri-environment schemes introduced across Europe with the aim of reversing the effects of previous intensification and enhancing agricultural land for wildlife (Kleijn and Sutherland, 2003). The UK introduced a new set of farming standards in 2005 with farmers now guaranteed subsidy payments, known as ‘cross-compliance’, as long as they follow a set of prescribed conditions aimed at improving the environmental value of their farms. A compulsory code of good practice will preclude farming land within 2 m of the centre of a hedge (DEFRA, 2005a). Beyond cross-compliance subsidies, farmers can also apply to put their farmland into Environmental Stewardship (ES). ES is a tiered system, with Entry-Level ES designed to allow most farmers access to the payments by compiling a farm management plan that aims to improve the features of their farm for wildlife and to maintain/improve the scenic value of the British countryside. The enhanced hedgerow management option within ES requires that the farmer cut the hedge no more than once every 2 years, that hedgerows are cut during the winter and that cutting be staggered across the farm. The combined aim of these prescriptions is to ensure that at least some of the hedgerow is allowed to flower every summer (Defra, 2005b). Properly managed hedgerows are valuable features, playing a key role in enhancing the wildlife value of farmland. Flowering hedgerows are an important source of food and shelter for a number of birds (Hinsley and Bellamy, 2000). Studies suggest that the ES schemes will have a beneficial effect, mainly for taxa such as invertebrates and birds (Kleijn and Sutherland 2003), Whittingham (2007) emphasizes the importance of monitoring the effects of ES to ensure that the scheme’s prescriptions meet the needs of a greater range of species. It is much less well understood how the changes to hedgerow management will effect small mammal abundance, and it is important that there is greater understanding of the factors that influence small mammal populations since small mammals provide the major source of prey biomass for many larger predators (Love et al., 2000). Small mammals also play a role in a range of important ecosystem processes (Hayward and Phillipson, 1979). Previous studies have established the main effects of varying hedgerow management within arable landscapes (Shore et al. 2005). Arable environments provide cover for small mammals due to the height and density of the crop. Small mammals have been shown to make substantial use of the field at certain times of the year (Tattersall et al. 2001; Tew et al. 2000; Todd et al. 2000). However, no small mammal species have been shown to make use of agriculturally improved pastoral fields at any time of year (Montgomery and Dowie 1993). Grazed pastoral land provides very little cover, restricting the movements of resident small mammal communities. Therefore, hedgerow management in predominantly dairy and cattle areas will likely have a large influence on the success of small mammal populations (Gelling et al. 2007). In particular, the level of ground cover vegetation along the hedgerow and the presence of some form of non-farmed margin can significantly affect the small mammal abundance (Bates and Harris 2009, Gelling et al. 2007). The 2m margin prescribed by ‘cross compliance’ is irrelevant in terms of providing cover within pastoral landscapes. Although the 2m margin remains uncut and clear of interference from the farmer (no fertilisers), year round grazing will mean that little cover is offered right up to the base of the hedgerow. Therefore, whereas ES management may boost small mammal numbers within arable areas (Shore et al. 2005), the value of ES hedgerow management within pastoral landscapes is less well understood. I utilised a number of hedgerow sites to compare hedgerow structure and small mammal communities on ES farms versus non-ES farms. For each farm, one site was selected to be representative and one to include a significant (2m plus) conservation buffer strip of unimproved, non-grazed grass/shrubland. I aimed to investigate (i) how ES management effects the hedgerow characteristics, in particular the level of ground cover for small mammals (ii) whether these ES prescriptions are providing any significant benefit for small mammal densities and (iii) as the movements of small mammals within pastoral landscapes are so restricted, could small mammal assemblages in hedgerows be significantly improved by including an unimproved, non-grazed, grassy margin or ‘conservation buffer strip’ (2+m from the edge of the hedgerow). Methods Sites The study was conducted over 20 different farms spread across County Durham and Northumberland. The farms were selected due to their suitability for this study, each farm containing both a hedgerow site with a conservation buffer strip and at least one without. All farms selected were representative in terms of habitat of those within the local area. A hedgerow was defined as a continuous line of woody vegetation no more than 3m tall. Hedgerow Survey The farms were paired, with one ES farm neighbouring a non-ES farm, making 10 farm pairs and 20 farms in total. Hedgerow surveys were carried out throughout June 2009. 10 hedgerows were randomly selected on each farm. All hedgerows on each farm were surveyed using an edited version of the Defra Hedgerow Survey Form and handbook (DEFRA, 2007). Each hedgerow was measured to determine its cross-sectional area. The character of the hedgerow was scored by reference to a series of standard diagrams, noting the level of available ground level cover for small mammals (1=little or no vegetation cover at ground level, 2=gappy cover at ground level, 3=constant vegetation cover from hedgerows at ground level). Additional variables were recorded, including whether the hedge had been flailed (mechanically cut) recently, i.e. during the previous winter, the number of standard and veteran trees and the number of woody species within the hedgerow. The data sets for cross-sectional area, level of grou nd vegetation cover and the number of woody species were averaged to produce an overall mean value for each farm. The number of flailed hedgerows was summed to give an overall percentage of hedgerows flailed on each farm. Trapping Procedure Previous trapping studies have shown that, unlike in arable land, small mammals within pastoral land stay almost entirely within the hedgerows and therefore hedgerows can be treated as linear habitats (Gelling et al. 2007). Trapping was carried out in two major trapping sessions, mid-April to June and mid-July to August, 2009. Within each of the 20 farm sites I selected a representative hedgerow and a hedgerow flanked by an unimproved 2m+ grassy margin, designated a conservation buffer strip, making a total of 40 trapping sites. Where possible the hedgerow sites were selected randomly, however, each ES site was required to have been managed according to the prescriptions of Stewardship farming, i.e. the hedgerows were cut not more than once every two years and the farmers adhered to the prescribed 2m margin of non-interference (2m from the centre of the hedge) (DEFRA 2005a, DEFRA 2005b). Every hedgerow selected was flanked by improved or semi-improved grassland for the grazing of dai ry cattle and/or the production of silage. At each site, a 104m section of isolated hedgerow (not directly connected to woodland) was selected.13 Longworth traps were placed at ground level within the hedgerow, at 8m intervals. Traps were provisioned with hay, apple, oat grains and dried mealworm. The traps were set at dusk and checked at dawn and dusk for three days. All targeted animals that were captured were fur-clipped to help identify re-captures. Species, sex and weight were recorded for each animal before release at the point of capture. Analysis Hedgerow characteristics were recorded and analysed using a paired measures multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) (SPSS 17.0.2). I had multiple dependent variables that I wished to analyse, however, using multiple one-way ANOVAs to try to do this would have raised the probability of a Type I error (Gibson et al. 2007). Therefore the data was investigated using a MANOVA which controls the experiment-wide error rate. Multiple dependent variables that were related (e.g. Cross sectional area of hedge and amount of ground cover, etc.) were analysed in one test, with the hedgerow management (ES managed or non-ES managed) being treated as the two levels of the treatment factor (Gibson et al. 2007). There was a total of 4 dependent variables; the mean cross-sectional area, the percentage of flailed hedgerows, the average number of woody species and the mean level of ground cover. For each trapping session the relative density was estimated as the minimum number alive (MNA), or the total number of individuals caught over the three days. Species richness was calculated as the number of different species caught. Using General Linear Modelling (GLM; Minitab 15), I examined the relationships between small mammal densities and a number of predictor variables. The dependent variables I investigated were the overall total small mammal density (MNA) and the total biomass of all small mammals caught within 104m. I also investigated the density of each individual species, constructing similar models for the number of captures and biomass for each individual species. I focused on wood mice Apodemus sylvaticus and bank voles Clethrionomys glareolus. There were also some captures of field voles Microtus agrestis and common shrew Sorex araneus, these data were not investigated individually but were included in the total density of small mammals and the total biomass. The pr edictor variables considered were the presence/absence of ES management, the presence/absence of a conservation buffer strip and the number of standard and veteran trees within the hedgerow. The relationships were analysed using a backward stepwise GLM, with all main predictors and their first order interactions initially included within the model. The insignificant interactions were then removed. Each trapping session was carried out over 3 days on 4 sites on neighbouring farms, the variation between trapping locations and times was taken into account by including the variable ‘block’ within the initial model, however, it was found to have no significance and was therefore removed from the final model. There are well documented seasonal variations in small mammal abundance (Alibhai and Gipps 1985; Flowerdew 1985; Butet et al. 2006), therefore, as there were two major trapping seasons (mid-April to May and Mid-June to July) I included the variable ‘season’ in all models. The number of captures of field voles and common shrew were too low to allow thorough analysis; however, the number of captures for each species was investigated using a Kruskal-Wallis test (Minitab 15) to determine the relationship between the presence of a buffer strip and their individual abundance. Results The total number of catches was 276 individual small mammals of four different species, during 240 trap sessions (dusk till dawn and dawn till dusk). The most abundant species were wood mice, making up 45% of the captures, 11% of which were juveniles, with a total capture of 122 individuals (61 in the first season of trapping and 61 in the second season). 32% (89 individuals) of captures were bank voles, none of which were juveniles, with 26 captures in season 1 and 53 captures in season 2. 17% of captures (48 individuals) were common shrews and 6% (17 individuals) were field voles. Table 1. Summary of the number of captures for each species Total Wood mice Captured – Season 1 (juveniles) / Season 2 (juveniles) Bank vole – Season 1 / Season 2 Field vole – Season 1 / Season 2 Common shrew – Season 1 / Season 2 Total – Season 1 / Season 2 Total N trapped throughout study 122 – 61 (2) / 61 (11) 89 – 36 / 53 17 – 4 / 13 48 – 28 / 20 276 – 129 / 147 Percentage of total 44 33 6 17 100 Percentage of hedgerows present 93 46 23 45 Effect of ES Management and Buffer strips A total of 40 hedgerows were surveyed with 20 hedgerows under ES hedgerow management and 20 hedgerows under non-ES management. ES sites had been under ES hedgerow management for 2 years or more. The measured dimensions of the hedgerow were used to estimate the hedgerow cross sectional area. Analysis using a paired measures MANOVA found no significant difference in the size of ES managed hedgerows to the size of non-ES managed hedgerows (F(1,9)=0.847, P=0.381). ES management also had no significant effect on the percentage of flailed hedgerows within the farm (F(1,9)=0.019, P=0.889). The woody species diversity within hedgerows was not significantly different between ES managed hedgerows and non-ES managed hedgerows (F(1,9)=3.047, P=0.115). There was a significant positive association of the presence of ES hedgerow management with the level of woody vegetation cover at ground level (F(1,9)=10.613, P=0.010). Table 2. Comparisons of hedgerow characteristics on ES managed farms versus non-ES managed farms. Data were analysed using a paired MANOVA. Mean (SE) Hedgerow characteristic Description of measurement ES Non-ES F(1,9) P Area Average cross sectional area/m2 2.99 (0.12) 2.83 (0.14) 0.847 0.381 Flailed Percentage of hedgerows that had been recently flailed (flailed during previous Winter) 26.00 (2.21) 25.00 (6.54) 0.019 0.893 Species diversity Number of woody species 3.16 (0.24) 2.73 (0.27) 3.047 0.115 Small mammal cover Average Area of small Mammal cover (1=little or no vegetation cover at ground level, 2=gappy cover at ground level, 3=constant vegetation cover from hedgerows at ground level) 2.63 (0.87) 2.13 (0.11) 10.613 0.010 Small Mammal Assemblages Backward stepwise general linear modelling was used to analyse the data. The results showed that buffer strips have a significant effect on the total number caught within the hedgerow (F(1,35)= 16.29, P A GLM for total biomass showed similar results with Season (F(1,34)=0.83, P=0.369) and the number of standard trees (F(1,34)=1.12, P=0.298) both having no significant effect on the total biomass. ES management had a positive association with total biomass (F(1,34)=4.92, P=0.033), as did the presence of a buffer strip (F(1,34)=27.62, P Wood mice were the most common species trapped, contributing 45% of the captures. The factors affecting wood mice captures were analysed using a backward stepwise GLM. Season had no significant effect (F(1,34)=2.36, P=0.134). Unlike the model involving ‘total captures’, ES management (F(1,34)=0.07, P=0.798) and Buffer Strip (F(1,34) A backward stepwise GLM was constructed for both ‘bank vole captures’ and ‘the total bank vole mass’, both models produced similar results. Season had no effect on bank vole captures (F(1,35)=2.06, P=0.160) and total bank vole mass (F(1,35)=1.66, P=0.206). The presence of ES management on the hedgerow had a significant positive effect on the number of bank vole captures (F(1,35)=7.15, P=0.011) and on the total bank vole mass (F(1,35)=5.91, P=0.020). The presence of a buffer also had a significant effect, increasing the number of bank vole captures (F(1,35)=34.90, P Table 3. Summary statistics from general linear models Model Variables F P Adj. R2 Total Captures Season F(1,35)=1.09 0.305 53.79% ES Managed F(1,35)=5.23 0.028a Buffer Strip F(1,35)=16.29 Standard Trees F(1,35)=0.91 0.346 Total Biomassc Season F(1,34)=0.83 0.369 65.32% ES Managed F(1,34)=4.92 0.033a Buffer Strip F(1,34)=27.62 Standard Trees F(1,34)=1.12 0.298 Season*Buffer Strip F(1,34)=3.18 0.083b Wood Mice Captures Season F(1,34)=2.36 0.134 79.72% ES Managed F(1,34)=0.07 0.798 Buffer Strip F(1,34) Standard Trees F(1,34)=79.65 Season*Standard Trees F(1,34)=4.81 0.035a Total Wood Mice Massd Season F(1,35)=1.36 0.252 69.06% ES Managed F(1,35)=0.26 0.616 Buffer Strip F(1,35)=0.05 0.831 Standard Trees F(1,35)=49.03 0.003a Bank Vole Captures Season F(1,35)=2.06 0.160 54.76% ES Managed F(1,35)=7.15 0.011a Buffer Strip F(1,35)=34.90 Standard Trees F(1,35)=4.41 0.043a Total Bank Vole Masse Season F(1,35)=1.66 0.206 50.74% ES Managed F(1,35)=5.91 0.020a Buffer Strip F(1,35)=28.11 Standard Trees F(1,35)=2.32 0.137 a – Significant to the 95% confidence level b – Significant to the 90% confidence level c Total Biomass was square root transformed before analysis. d Wood Mice Mass was square root transformed before analysis. e Bank Vole Mass was square root transformed before analysis. A total of 17 field voles were captured, with all 17 trapped in hedgerows flanked by a conservation buffer strip. A total of 48 Common shrews were trapped, 81% of which were caught in hedgerows not flanked by a buffer strip Table 4. Non-target species captures. Effect of buffer strip, analysed using Kruskal-Wallis test. Total Captures Species Buffer Strip Present No Buffer Strip H P (adjusted for ties) Field vole 17 0 8.30 0.004 Common shrew 9 38 12.73 Discussion Hedgerow characteristics are known to affect small mammal numbers. Hedgerows with many gaps and a lack of ground cover support significantly lower small mammal populations (Gelling et al. 2007). Small mammals will select against hedgerows with a lack of vegetative cover due to the increased risk of predation (Orrock et al. 2004). Our results suggest that ES farms produce denser hedgerows with more cover at the ground level than non-ES farms. This is reflected in the small mammal survey which shows a somewhat strong association between small mammal numbers and ES hedgerows. However, having surveyed the farms and the farmers, I acknowledge that a wide number of variables affect the characteristics of the hedgerow. I suggest that the state of the hedgerows for small mammals is more significantly affected by the mindset of the farmer. Those farmers who have moved onto the Entry level ES scheme are generally those who most actively manage their farm. One supporting piece of data for this theory, is the number of flailed hedgerows on ES farms compared to non-ES farms. The hedgerow survey found that there were no differences in the number of recently flailed hedgerows within ES farms compared to non-ES farms, therefore, even though the cutting of hedgerows on ES farms is restricted, it still occurs as often on the ES farms within this survey than on the non-ES farms. The suggestion is that those farmers who are on the ES scheme are more actively involved in managing their farm, including their hedgerows, therefore hedgerows on ES farms commonly provide denser vegetation, less gaps and more cover at ground level. The typical ES farmer is more actively managing the hedge as a boundary or barrier to cattle than the typical non-ES farmer. The author suggests this conclusion having discussed hedgerow management with the farmers as part of the hedgerow survey and having a background in agriculture, however, it is also recognised that this topic goes beyond the scope and ava ilable data of this investigation. Hedgerows can be thought of as corridors linking woodland habitat, allowing small mammal migration (Soule and Terbough 1999), however, within the British pastoral landscape, hedgerows are often acting as the sole habitat for small mammals (Fitzgibbon 1997). My investigation found that the ratio of juvenile to adult wood mice increased during the season, with greater numbers present later in the summer, this is consistent with the observations of others (Alibhai and Gipps 1991, Flowerdew 1991). The breeding season for most small mammals begins in spring and ends in late summer, therefore it is natural that more juveniles are present in hedgerows as the summer progresses and they travel outward to establish their own home ranges. The presence of fully grown, breeding adults in both seasons of trapping indicates that animals are resident within the hedgerows, providing support for the argument that linear habitats can provide suitable habitat to support viable populations of small mamma ls. My results show that the total small mammal abundance and therefore the availability of prey biomass for predators is increased in hedgerows under ES management. The results of the hedgerow survey suggest that there is greater ground level vegetation cover in ES hedgerows. An increase in the amount of physical habitat creates greater foraging opportunities and can increase small mammal abundance (Gelling et al. 2007). Small mammals prefer hedgerows with greater ground level cover as they provide better refuge from predators (Orrock et al. 2004). Whereas the benefits of ES management for small mammal abundance remain unclear, this investigation highlights the importance of buffer strips. The value of unimproved grassy margins, in arable landscapes, for small mammal numbers has already been shown (Shore et al. 2005). This study suggests that the presence of a buffer strip along a hedgerow can provide a much improved habitat to support larger small mammal numbers in hedgerows within pastoral landscapes. Grassy margins are a refuge for small mammals beyond the hedgerow; they allow increased safety for foraging and greater shelter (Orrock et al. 2004). To understand the variation in the numbers trapped of each species, we need to establish an understanding of the differing ecological requirements for each species. The two most abundant species were the wood mouse and the bank vole. The results show that wood mice are found in greater numbers in hedgerows containing standard/veteran trees. This conclusion is supported by previous studies which have shown that trees within hedgerows are beneficial for wood mice (Montgomerie and Dowie, 1993). Mice often take shelter in burrows formed beneath trees/within tree roots which may suggest why this species was found more commonly within hedgerows containing standard/veteran trees (Montgomerie and Dowie, 1993). Wood mice are a generalist species occupying a wide variety of habitat (Flowerdew 1993). They general occupy a relatively large home range and travel extensively, consuming a wide range of food sources depending upon season and availability (Flowerdew 1993). This is reflected in the re sults, with wood mice having been trapped in 93% of all the hedgerows. The results also show that wood mice abundance is not affected by ES management for hedgerows, nor is it significantly improved by the presence of a buffer strip. Wood mice have been shown to avoid hedgerows with major gaps, and wood mouse captures have been shown to increase with proximity to woodland (Gelling et al. 2007). Wood mice have relatively large home ranges and the suggestion is that individuals rarely stay long within any one hedgerow; rather they travel through, utilising hedgerows for foraging and shelter between woodland (Montgomery and Dowie 1993; Gelling et al 2007; Todd et al 2000; Tew et al. 2000). Therefore, ES management and the presence of buffer strips have little effect on the number of wood mouse captures; more important is the proximity to woodland or the presence of trees within a hedgerow which provide the preferred shelter for the wood mouse (Todd et al. 2000; Tew et al. 2000). Bank voles are a more specialist species, and generally occupy much smaller home ranges than do wood mice. They are burrowers, using ground vegetation to create runs and pathways in deciduous habitats (Morris 1982; Alibhai and Gipps 1985). Bank voles are a major prey resource for a number of raptors and bank vole abundance has been shown to significantly affect raptor populations (Korpimaki and Norrdahl, 1991). Other studies have found that bank vole numbers are positively associated with the size of hedgerows (Pollard Relton, 1970; Tew, 1994; Bellamy et al., 2000). Grassy margins of 2m plus have been shown to significantly increase bank vole numbers in arable fields (Shore et al. 2005), my results show that this conclusion extends to pastoral landscapes with bank vole numbers being significantly increased by the presence of an unimproved grassy margin or conservation buffer strip. The results also suggest that ES management improves hedgerows for bank voles, with bank vole abundanc e found to be significantly higher on ES hedgerow sites. Bank voles are found in much greater abundance in areas which provide thick ground vegetation and suffer little disturbance (Tew 1994), my results suggest that this is partially provided by ES management, however, the creation of grassy margins along hedgerows could significantly improve bank vole abundance in pastoral landscapes. The creation of margins could also be significant in the conservation of field voles. Field vole numbers in the UK are in decline believed to be due to the loss of rough grass habitat in intensively managed arable regions (Harris et al., 1995; Love et al., 2000). Field voles are specialists and depend upon rough, ungrazed grassland within woodland and hedgerows. Field voles are generally only found within areas of long grass (Alibhai and Gipps, 1991b). Very few captures of field voles were recorded within this experiment, however all field voles captures occurred within hedgerows flanked by conservation buffer strips. The presence of a buffer strip may provide the field voles’

Saturday, January 18, 2020

Analyze Curriculum Foundations Essay

Choose one of the four foundations of curriculum (philosophical, historical, psychological, or social), and contrast its importance with the other three foundations. How does your selected foundation apply to your place of work/study? Charles Darwin; the father of speciation, stated in his book â€Å"On the Origin of Species† that the intelligence of mankind is merely the result of higher evolution. This theory is now being challenged by Marc Hauser, who is currently the director of cognitive evolution at Harvard University. In a recent article published in Scientific American, Hauser stated that humans possess four abilities that are not found in other species which are the essence of humaningueness. Those abilities are Generative Computation (the ability to generate limitless words and concepts), Promiscuous Combinations of ideas (the ability to merge different domains of knowledge), Mental Symbols (ways to encode sensory experiences), and Abstract Thought (the comprehension of things beyond what we can see). Each of these abilities are directly influenced by philosophical attributes, historical experiences, psychological behaviors, and social impacts (Wolchover). The purpose of this research is to examine and compare the importance of these influences in our educational system. Society has always been the driving force behind persuading Individuals behavior. When talking about curriculum it is the social factors of family, peers, idols, and teachers that possess the greatest ability of manipulating our young people today. The family will infuse its beliefs or morals onto its members. For example; if the parents of a family are uneducated and working low income jobs, education may not be their primary concern. Instead their interest may shift to basic needs, such as bringing more income into the house as soon as possible. That usually reflects a negative outlook on education. In turn the student will be unable to receive adequate help form their parents on school work. In hindsight; if both parents are highly educated, they will place greater infuses on academics. Their expectation in their children’s education becomes much higher. Peers and Idols have a hypnotic like hold on our young people and harness the power to undermine even the most stable of families. The desire to be accepted can be overwhelming to most. Some teenagers turn to idolizing rappers, TV stars, or sport figures in hopes of being recognized. The artist that are choosing; usually defies the law and express little to no morals towards women, society, and puts no value on education. We can see this today in our young people, with the sagging paints, rebelling attitudes, belittling female, fathering multiple children from as many women as possible and leaving the mothers to take care of the children. This type of behavior has become very desirable. There is no doubt that society has a hold on forming the behavior of our young people, but it is the psychological need to bradding or concepts of life. This concept may go by many names such as self-actualization or individuation. No matter what you call it, it is a natural drive within the human psychic to behave in a manner that is coherent to one self. Educational Psychology focuses on how children learn. A lot of research has gone into this field of study. It tries to answer questions like how effective is intervention, how should a room be set up for opium learning, how should lessons be taught, and how students learn and develop overall. As you can see this this discipline is concerned with the mindset of the students; what they are feeling, how they see or perceive situations. This is an attempt to put the students at ease by feeling safe and understood. To succeed this field of study must incorporate the social factors of the students in that area. Without understanding their social needs or wants any efforts are predetermined to fail. Philosophy on the other hand applies the directions for teachers to follow. It tells parents and students how teacher or school intends to treat them. The schools philosophy might instruct teachers on how to give a lesson or what order to teach their subjects. An example of this might insist that each student must make a passing grade before the teacher is allowed to advance the class to another topic or tell a biology teacher that he or she will have to teach cell functions before teaching Mendel’s genetics. The Schools philosophy statement might read something like this; our school believes that all students are unique individuals that deserve a safe secure place that will nurture them emotionally as well as intellectually. Provide a place that would escalate their potential to new highs and promote respect towards family, school and society, but a teachers philosophy would be more geared for his or her room. Over all the philosophy in curriculum provides guidance, a way of doing things, and opinions on how students should be treated. This type of discipline requires the knowledge of the communities believes, economic status, and the desires of the parents for their children. Like psychological behaviors; it has to take in account the social attributes of its population. Around the nineteenth century public schools were set up to promote reading, writing, and arithmetic. These were the skills needed to hold a job. Subjects like biology, civics, world history or health were unimportant to the public schools and was reserved for private schools whose students were being groomed for universities. The welfare of the student’s character or moral values where of no concern to the schools at this time. Only recently have the schools shifted to developing the entire student’s well-being. Focusing more on what it takes to produce a well-round individual which has the ability to rationalize complex situations and develop into a productive member of society. This is achieved by teaching all core subjects not ju st a select few. To succeed the schools have to put real-world applications to old-world disciplines. Today all public schools would like to see every student attend some kind of institute for higher learning. Today’s institutes of learning will incorporate psychology (a natural drive within the human psychic to behave in a manner that is coherent to one self, set up parameters for teachers curriculum), Philosophy (tells parents and students how teacher or school intends to treat them and what they are willing to provide), historical ( brought about the intergrading of core classes, set a pace on when a student is ready to advance to more complex subjects), and they have to take into consideration the social influences of the families, peers, as well as the community if they are to form a working curriculum. The curriculum should be an organized process that promotes a more student centered approach to learning, by directing the course of study in such a manner that it challenges the student at a constant upgrade in levels of difficulty which allows the student to comprehend a nd utilize pass lessons or experiences and promote individualization within the society. I have been teaching middle school biology for eight years now and we have to follow certain guidelines that make up our curriculum. It all starts with the entrance of the room. It must be inviting and shouts out come see. Once in the room they have to feel safe and comfortable. This room has to become their safe haven, where all the pressures of home and peers become nonexistence. I have to develop all aspects of the student’s life. Not only does this involve the core classes, but it could involve maturity levels, self-confidence, behavior problems, and social interactions. The class subject has to be taught according to the State of Alabama’s Board of Education. I am given a set of standards each year and must cover each one to mastery. My lessons have to meet every students learning style, and treat every student as an individual with different needs and goals. Every lesson has to have three parts a beginning (this must capture the students interest and be a prelude to that days topic), during (this is the meat and potatoes of the lesson, this could range from reading text to given lectures and everything in between. In this section of the lesson the objectives for that day must be met), and finally the after part of the lesson ( this is where the students have to show me that they were able to comprehend that days objectives and it gives me a chance to analyze my delivery of the subject matter). Before the curriculum can have any effect on the students I have to get to know them. I need to understand how they live and what they want out of life. This will allow me to teach in a manner that relates to them. It will give my lessons value and a means to an end. As you can tell all the disciplines are incorporated into every lesson. For this system to work all teachers have to look beyond the course of study and take more interest into the stu dents. References Natalie Wolchover, Life’s Little Mysteries Staff Writer (What Distinguishes Humans from Other Animals?) 03 July 2011 Time: 09:21 AM ET

Friday, January 10, 2020

The Tried and True Method for Disease Research Paper Example in Step by Step Detail

The Tried and True Method for Disease Research Paper Example in Step by Step Detail To approach the paper with at least anxiety, you should choose a topic that you are feeling comfortable writing about, and one which you're confident you can grasp the appropriate scholarship on. The next time you must do a small research for a guide, essay, school paper or scholarly paper, don't forget the vertical files. When you're writing your research paper's introduction, you ought to be building it around a particular outline that gives a general review of the paper. If you're writing a research paper, make certain you are aware of what your thesis will be about, and hunt for how you're going to receive your points across through the research which you use. There are a lot of ways to prevent the usage of plagiarism such as citing the sources of writing that you're attempting to use. You don't need to be worried about plagiarism with us. You don't need to understand how to compose papers in MLA, APA, or any other referencing format for you to receive a great grade. As a writer, you have the choice of narrowing the reach of your paper. What About Disease Research Paper Example? You may also abbreviate years in some specific small business expressions. The person is likely to forget some points. The hours it requires to go through research and see whether it works for your project or whatever it's that you're doing is limitless. Possessing proper research skills, include knowing what it is you are looking for when you are trying to find your research on your computer, don't forget to use, sites that you trust, Wikipedia sure it says on the internet that it's a superior site but in the event that you can stay away from using it the n do so, people are able to go to that website and adjust the information to allow it to be untrue. However complex the topic or the class you're dealing is, we've highly experienced experts in virtually every area of learning and research. When citing a source, make sure you did enough research to make certain that it is the proper source, ensure that you put quotations of the part which you want to cite, make sure that you place the source location so viewers can observe where you cited, and finally, put down the author of the source. Opt for the incorrect endeavor and you'll have a difficult time motivating your children to write. If you're still having trouble, speak to your professor or classmates to have ideas about topics that you may enjoy. The Most Popular Disease Research Paper Example Everybody has a different way they research so the right way to research differs for everybody. Aside from the simple fact that, in the event of my own lesson for you here, your topic sentence isn't your thesis statement, it is likewise important to recognize that the exact first words your audience will read are a few of the most essential to making an excellent essay. The very first step, nevertheless, is to understand what your topic is. If it is a particular topic or directs you to select a topic about a particular subject or time period, you're in luck. Quite simply, an ethical argument tries to prove that a particular issue is either morally right or wrong. For instance, if you're writing an essay on How Global Warming can be decreased, it's going to be a fantastic idea you take a minute to define what global warming is about in your introductory paragraph. What's more, the strategies utilized by the writer to attain a rhetorical influence on the reader vary depending of audience and purpose. It's especially frustrating if you haven't any idea how to compose an effective persuasive essay. What to Do About Disease Research Paper Example Before You Miss Your Chance The usage of the cost-effective methods is projected to decrease the danger of the disease among a full population of the folks. Such mechanistic studies can cause new therapy strategies. Research and education are necessary to discover the very best prevention strategies and treatment alternatives. Non-drug approaches aren't powerful in helping memory loss, altho ugh there are therapeutic approaches that help retain memory and can offer support for those who have mild dementia. How to Get Started with Disease Research Paper Example? When selecting a definition, bear in mind that there are many kinds of ethical arguments and that the direction you argue for your specific claim depends in large part on how you define your terms. Please remember that the next examples only represent a small part of the distinct ethical arguments that philosophers have made throughout time. To the contrary, you might not have been extended a specific topic whatsoever. At times, in elaborating a point, you'll need to give examples. Here's What I Know About Disease Research Paper Example The inflammation tends to return in regions of the intestine next to the area that's been removed. There isn't a cure for rheumatoid arthritis. A number of the symptoms can vary from mild to severe. Since there is absolutely no non cause to celiac disease, there's no way to keep the growth of the disease. A pathophysiology topic aims at studying the main cause of a specific disease. The correct diagnosis may take some moment. If somebody with celiac disease proceeds to eat gluten, studies have demonstrated he or she'll boost their probability of gastrointestinal cancer by a factor of 40 to 100 times that of the standard population.

Wednesday, January 1, 2020

Emily Dickinsons Success Is Counted Sweetest Criticism

Jirawoot Sararit (B.A. English Linguistics) 1st Class Honors, SWU, Thailand Success Is Counted Sweetest Success Is Counted Sweetest is a well-known poem written by Emily Dickinson in 1859. It is obviously seen that the message of the poem is that people who do not succeed are those who truly understand success for what it is (Cummings, 2013). In other words, deprivation can lead to greater understanding and appreciation of what people lack. This paper is composed of three points including how the unity of the paradoxical idea of the poem is presented, how the poem can be viewed historically and biographically in feminist aspects, and how the central idea of the poem is responded. The Unity of the Paradoxical Idea in†¦show more content†¦To begin with, the use of the word nectar‟ along with the word sweet‟ in the first stanza implies femininity. It can be assumed that there is a message from a woman‟s point of view. According to history and her biography, Emily Dickinson had modernist ideas that women should have as equal rights as men which they did not have at that time. In fact, women, especially wives, were treated as the slaves of men in the eyes of the law even though women can do several duties that men cannot. Therefore, women started to work and to express their voice. (Leiter, 2007). This background knowledge can be understood to explain when success „to comprehend a nectar‟ changes to „victory‟ in the last two stanzas. The image of a battle which causes physical and mental pain to the defeated soldiers (men) is mentioned as „agonized.‟ It is clear that even though men are strong, they st ill have weaknesses as shown in the image of losing the battle. It is showed that both genders have weaknesses. Therefore, both of them should be equal. This feminist idea is considered to be a dominant one during Emily‟s lifetime. The Response to the Central Idea of the Poem After reading the first stanza, the central idea of the poem seems absolutely right to me. The whole poem captivates my attention to realize the value of what I am deprived. It can beShow MoreRelatedEssay about Emily Dickinsons Use of Humor and Irony1306 Words   |  6 PagesEmily Dickinsons Use of Humor and Irony While much of Emily Dickinsons poetry has been described as sad or morose, the poetess did use humor and irony in many of her poems. This essay will address the humor and/ or irony found in five of Dickinsons poems: Faith is a Fine Invention, Im Nobody! Who are you?, Some keep the Sabbath Going to Church and Success Is Counted Sweetest. The attempt will be made to show how Dickinson used humor and / or irony for the dual purposes of comic reliefRead MoreEmily Dickinson Research Paper1928 Words   |  8 PagesDickinson Research Paper Emily Dickinson is one of the most influential poets of all time, and has a unique way of using literal imagery to paint a picture in the readers mind. The best poets are those that excel at using their words to create clear, concrete images and intrigue their reader. Dickinson began writing poetry around the year 1855, and prospered for another 10 years. Some of her most famous poems include â€Å"I Taste a liquor Never Brewed†, â€Å"Success is Counted Sweetest†, and â€Å"Wild nights – Wild