Dear Colleagues,

Let me first express gratitude to those who have participated in our conferences and contributed to the ongoing efforts to foster the excellence of biology education in the great state of New York. I hope your summer was productive and that you were able to travel and/or attend other conferences to keep abreast of developments in your field of study. As past presidents have mentioned, early in this 21st century we have immediate access to a vast data base of knowledge. In my field alone there have been at least three significant breakthroughs over the past year. During the ancient era, religion and politics influenced the minions’ understanding of these discoveries, often times misinterpreting the facts. Similar influences persist even in this century, including the instant gratification of blogs, myspace, non-peer reviewed media, and the plethora of advocacy groups championing their biases. One of our challenges lies in training our students to recognize legitimate resources.

However, even with our system of peer-reviewed journals and time-tested theories, there is room for debate among scientists. That is the essence of science – eternally searching for the true answer. Hence, last year’s conference centered on the laboratory experience and inquiry-based learning. The scientific method- observe, question, test, and analyze- cuts across all disciplines. The real scientist will critically evaluate facts, both theirs and others, to draw succinct conclusions. I firmly believe the hands-on approach is the best method for student learning in the natural sciences. But can this be merged with other methods of instruction that expound upon basic concepts, whether from a talking head, book chapters, or online instruction? I would say yes, if the scientific approach challenges the student to seek outside information on their own accord (active learners), and decide (think) whether the facts they find (knowledge) are indeed reliable, accurate, or relevant to the inquiry (science). As trained scientists we should be mentoring them in this quest.

Change is difficult, and I was pleased with the discourse after each workshop. Some may say, “If it ain’t broke don’t fix it,” but hopefully we come to understand it’s about how we can make it better. Just from a curriculum standpoint, we heard about change at some top rank universities. I hope you agree we should be on top of the learning curve as we funnel students into their ranks. Some of you already expressed ideas regarding the improvement of methods of instruction and were privy to insight toward garnering funds for testing them. I wish you success in your endeavors.