PHIL 435 - Environmental Ethics
|
Artifacts #1 and #2
The MET program allows for up to six credits to come from outside the program, however this was the only external course that I took. When I applied to have this course approved there were two main reasons for my desire to take PHIL 435. Given my interest in biology and the environment, I felt that this course would assist me in my own teaching practice by helping me to examine my beliefs surrounding topics such as genetically modified organisms, and environmental stewardship. Secondly, I hadn't experienced online learning prior the MET program and I was curious to see whether courses outside of an educational program would be as supportive as the previous two I had just completed. I have chosen to include two papers in order to provide examples of the conclusions I came to about respect for nature and GMOs.
|
Reflections for PHIL 435
Throughout PHIL 435, I made note of ways in which this course differed from ETEC courses. One of the first differences I noticed, was the promptness of the welcome message. My experience throughout this program has been that on the first day of every course I received a welcome message with instructions about how to log in. This was not the case with PHIL 435 as it was three days before I heard anything from the instructor. The second thing I noticed was the level of participation by my classmates. As previously mentioned, much of my understanding of topics through the MET program can be attributed to the discussion forums, so I was surprised at the limited participation I was observing in PHIL 435. Though I can only hypothesize as to the reason for this difference, I can still take away some valuable lessons:
Throughout PHIL 435, I made note of ways in which this course differed from ETEC courses. One of the first differences I noticed, was the promptness of the welcome message. My experience throughout this program has been that on the first day of every course I received a welcome message with instructions about how to log in. This was not the case with PHIL 435 as it was three days before I heard anything from the instructor. The second thing I noticed was the level of participation by my classmates. As previously mentioned, much of my understanding of topics through the MET program can be attributed to the discussion forums, so I was surprised at the limited participation I was observing in PHIL 435. Though I can only hypothesize as to the reason for this difference, I can still take away some valuable lessons:
- The process of building a community begins right on day one. It is important to encourage sharing right away in order to set the tone for the class.
- Not all on-line learning communities will be as keen as those found in the MET program. It is important to remember that not all students will have an innate desire to participate, so a course must be built in order to encourage participation.
- It is important to design a course in such a way to promote continued participation throughout the entire length of the course.
Return to Pioneer Species
References
Long, J., (2009). Ethics of Respect for Nature. (Unpublished graduate essay). University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.
Long, J., (2009). Genetically Modified Organisms. (Unpublished graduate essay). University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.
© Long, J., (2010). Caminata 1 [photograph].
© Long, J., (2011). Reforestation flower [photograph].
© Long, J., (2012). Fungi at the Reserve [photograph].
© Long, J., (2014). La Ventana [photograph].
Long, J., (2009). Ethics of Respect for Nature. (Unpublished graduate essay). University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.
Long, J., (2009). Genetically Modified Organisms. (Unpublished graduate essay). University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.
© Long, J., (2010). Caminata 1 [photograph].
© Long, J., (2011). Reforestation flower [photograph].
© Long, J., (2012). Fungi at the Reserve [photograph].
© Long, J., (2014). La Ventana [photograph].