On one of the first nice days of the spring, I unfortunately had only a one hour gap between work at the Lincoln Animal Hospital and class at Roger Williams University. Thankfully, I had the awesome opportunity to visit the Aust Family Reserve during my break to finally appreciate the nature found in Rhode Island and spend some time outdoors. The preserve is conveniently located in Lincoln, Rhode Island, only a short drive out of Providence and a few minutes from my work in Lincoln. It was easy to find, and although there were only a few parking spots, it seemed like off-street parking was available.
The trails were marked with paint on trees and were pretty easy to follow. I followed the railway trail which connected to the pond loop. The railway trail was mostly covered by trees, and there were streams running along the trail. Although I visited before any real greenery returned for the season, there was still some interesting species to look at. Turkey tail fungus fanned out on tree bark, and the sound of woodpeckers filled the area. Towards the end of the railway trail, there was an abundance of bird species filling the area. The pond loop began to open up a little, with less congestion of trees, and eventually opened up to a patch of grass overlooking the pond. It was a great location to have a picnic or lay in the sun for a while. The pond was very serene, with a few ducks here and there. The trails made for a nice mix of forestry and open area. The Aust Family Preserve was a perfect place for a quick escape into nature. It’s location just outside providence and its fairly short trails made it an ideal place to spend my lunch break and enjoy the beautiful weather.
0 Comments
Reflective Introduction:
Tim Mooney, the Marketing and Communications Manager for the Rhode Island Nature Conservancy, visited our class on 2/26/18. During this visit, he introduced a potential project, in which a group of students would generate a set of deliverables for the RI Nature Conservancy to be used on their newly renovated website. After his visit, we (Ava Mastrostefano, Ethan Jordan, Jacob Fies, and Zachary Wagner) came together as a group and began the process of figuring out what information we wanted to generate for the Conservancy and in what form we wanted it to take. Eventually, after going through the process of figuring out what was possible and practical for us to do, we landed on generating site descriptions for four preserves located near the school. After communicating with Tim on which preserves were in the most need for new site descriptions, the four sites chosen were: Pocasset Ridge, Whitehead Preserve, Carter Preserve, and the Aust Family at Lime Rock Preserve. We then decided who would visit wich preserve, with Ethan visiting Pocasset, Zach visiting Whitehead, Jacob visiting Carter, and Ava visiting the Aust Family Preserve at Lime Rock. Each approached visiting their site slightly differently (as will be outlined below) but with the general focus on walking some trails, gathering information, and taking photos. Ethan (at Pocasset): When i visited the Pocasset ridge preserve, I stuck to the trails that brought me through the southern portion of the preserve. I stopped at the entrance to take a photo of a map of the trails on a wooden stand out front for future reference in the park. Most of the ground was muddy from the recent rain and melted snow and most of the streams were flowing at high levels. I progressed at a leisurely pace keeping an eye out for birds and wildlife as well as paying attention to the various sound that rose above the quiet nature of the forest. Eventually I came to a rocky plateau that dropped off on the other side and the woods spread out like a valley beneath it. Moving on from there the surrounding grounds started to become more marsh like with solid earth turning into thick mud with several small ponds scattered throughout. Eventually I came to a point where I noticed that the horizon through the trees was taken up entirely by a massive rock wall as I got closer I realised it was a huge rocky ridge that rose some 50 feet off of the forest floor. Making my way to the back side of the ridge I scaled to back portion on the ridge and eventually made it to the top where I was greeted by a treetop panorama of the preserve. After reaching this point I checked the photo I took of the map and made my way back to the entrance of the preserve and left feeling satisfied with the many beautiful sites that i had seen. Zach (at Whitehead): At Whitehead, I focused on walking the Dundery Brook Trail and Blanche’s Path, as the recent rain left Hope’s Path too muddy to traverse. I walked slowly, taking recordings of the wildlife I heard, taking photographs of wildlife and evidence of animals in the area, and documenting how I felt while walking the trail. Additionally, I photographed the boardwalk path as proof of its maintenance and the signs explaining the trails and their history. After walking the boardwalk path, which ended at Blanche’s path, and along Bumblebee pond, my progress was stopped by a thicket of branches that had grown across the path. I then turned around and walked back to my car at the entrance of the trail. Walking back on the trail offered its own insights, as I saw fur and tracks that I had not previously seen. The site, while small, offered plenty of tracks and sounds of wildlife, and if I had stayed longer, I would have seen those same raccoons, coyotes, deer, and ducks. Jacob (at Cater): When visiting the Francis C. Carter Preserve, I arrived at the entrance off of Old Mill Road. I briefly stopped upon leaving my car to look over some of the wildlife I could possibly come across, as it was outlined on a large wooden sign near the entrance. From there I ventured down a trail loop that consisted of the: Grassland Loop, Grassland Connector, and Narragansett Loop trails. During this trail loop, I was able to experience a sample of each ecosystem present within the preserve. At each location I made a point to note what kinds of flora and fauna might be seen while visiting the preserve. Additionally I made a point to photograph anything I found particularly interesting, so that I could remind myself of the experience for the writing process. The final thing I ensured to make note of was the different accesibility/recreation level of the different trails I encountered. All of these together, I had hoped would give me a good sense of not only what people may see on a hike, but also the physical requirements needed to traverse the preserve. Ava (at Aust Family): I visited the Aust Family Reserve on a beautiful 48 degree afternoon. I entered at the main entrance on Wilbur Road. There were two main loops-- the Pond Loop and the Moshassuck Loop-- connected by the Connector Trail. Since Manton Pond was one of the main attractions on this reserve, I decided to take the Railway Trail to the Pond Loop to get my best possible views. The trails were marked with painted trees. Some parts of the path were clearly visible, but at other points I had to search for the next marked tree to determine my direction. During my time at the Aust Family Reserve, I enjoyed hearing and seeing a variety of bird species as well is some really interesting tree fungus. Most of the trail was surrounded by trees, and eventually lead to a beautiful open area overlooking the pond. The trail I took totaled about two miles and was perfect for an afternoon walk. The Nature Conservancy is an organization dedicated to promoting the preservation and exploration of nature reserves throughout the United States and the world. The Rhode Island Nature Conservancy protects a number of reserves that can be utilized by the public for anything from casual walks to several mile hikes. In order to raise awareness and attract visitors to these sites, we visited four sites to document the types of experiences they each uniquely offer. With photos and personal experience, we have developed web content that is attractive to a diverse audience including those interested in ecological knowledge and the general public. Our hope is that this material will help bring more visitors to these sites and inspire people to be interested in environmental protection. Pocasset: A series of well managed and winding trails that leads through 500 acres of lush woods and swampy marshlands. Numerous fast running streams run through various portions of the park one of which is crossed by a stone bridge which sites adjacent to the remains of an old saw mill. Numerous large rock formations of varying size lay scattered throughout the preserve and offer impressive elevated views of the forest. The largest of which is high rock, a massive rocky ridge that rises as much as 50 feet above the surrounding ground and offers a panoramic tree top level view of the surrounding landscape and a very productive spot for bird watchers. A huge variety of plant life grows within the preserve and large variety of birds can be seen in the preserve year round. The primary entrance to the trail is located off of 2910 Main Road, Tiverton, RI, a sign at the intersection of Main Road and Nannaquaket Road in Tiverton . The preserve features over 3.5 miles of trails. The trails are all marked by colored tags on trees to allow hikers to gain reference of their location and there are detailed maps at the trailheads as well. Whitehead: An easily accessed boardwalk trail meandering over wetlands and through a lush wood, tucked behind a suburban park. The Whitehead Nature preserve is 110 acres of pristine forested wetland nestled within Little Compton, surrounding Bumblebee pond. The rare endemic plant life and variation of habitat supports over 60 species of birds in the spring and a myriad of other wildlife year-round. The Dundery Brook Trail, its entrance located within Little Compton’s Veteran’s Field Park, is a boardwalk trail winding through a wetland forested with black locust trees, opening to a pond surrounded by a flowering meadow. The calls of wood ducks, songbirds, and peeping frogs echo through the wood throughout all of spring. The 3,000 feet of boardwalk followed by a half mile of grassy path by Bumblebee pond is perfect for those looking for a leisurely hike through the woods. Additionally, the Dundery Brook Trail is wheelchair accessible, and has many benches that allow the hiker to sit back and relax amongst the trees and birdsong. Carter: Located less than 20 minutes from Charlestown Beach, a popular RI summer destination, sits the Francis C. Carter Memorial Preserve, the second largest wildlife preserve in the state. Whether you are looking for a multi-mile hike lasting the day, or short 20 minute stroll through woods, the Carter preserve is the ideal local. With over 840 Acres of land and 9 distinct trails, the Carter Preserve has a wide variety of ecosystems to explore. Whether it be, grassland, shrubland, coniferous forest, or hardwood forest, the preserve has something for everyone. While exploring the 35 acres of grassland, you will be able to hear the songs various bird species from the large Osprey to the tiny Grasshopper Sparrow. Venturing deeper into the forest, Black Birch and White Oak trees start to pop up on either side with various species of squirrles calling these trees home. For the animal lovers, a particular treat to see could include: White-tailed Deer, Wild Turkey, and even some Red-Tailed Hawks. With three main entrances to the preserve, no consecutive visits ever have to be the same. Aust Family at Limerock: Tucked away in the rural-suburbs of Lincoln, Rhode Island lies a quick escape into a natural New England landscape. Just 15 minutes from Providence, the Aust Family Reserve offers a set of marked trails overlooking the scenic Manton Pond, and is the ideal location for a short and sweet nature walk ranging from 1-3 miles. The Aust Family Reserve offers nature walks along what was historically the Providence-Woonsocket Trolley Line. Along with the reserves rich history, it offers scenic pond views and towering trees, some tagged with the intricate design of Turkey tail fungus. The reserve is also an ideal location for bird watchers, as the sounds and sights of woodpeckers and black-and-white warblers surround that path’s visitors. A beautiful picnic area overlooks the pond, making the Aust Family Reserve an ideal location for both avid nature enthusiasts, bird watchers, or a lunch-break retreat into the scenic woods of New England. These texts raised a variety of issues relevant to this course. They focused on the issue of inclusion and diversity in scientific rhetoric, specifically as it relates to the March For Science. The March for Science, in short, aims to protest the Trump administration's anti-science policies. In doing so, the scientific community has failed to a) recognize issues of social sciences (race and gender inequality, pay gaps, intolerance, homophobia, etc) as issues of science, and b) recognize the discrimination inherent in the field itself (again, pay inequality, discrimination, sexual harassment, weeding women out of STEM careers). Although the March for Science never outrightly said "this is a march for privileged white male scientists only", their discourse on social media was far from inclusive, forming outrage and lack of support from many communities. Not only is it upsetting to people, but it divides the scientific community and limits the amount of meaningful discourse between different members of the community.
These points are extremely relevant to this course. It highlights how important it is to consider your audience when talking about science. Even the slightest hint of omission can divide a community and prohibit meaningful discourse. Not only must we consider our audiences when talking about science, but we must focus on more than just our hard scientific findings. We must acknowledge how science affects the world in a social sense as well. The issues in this text are certainly relevant to our final project. Since our project entails publishing material on a website that should be inclusive to all, we will definitely have to be careful about our wording and make sure we are inclusive as possible. We must be careful not to make any assumptions about our audience and make all people feel welcome and invited to visit Nature Conservancy Reserves. In this text, Smart studies public arguments and discourse regarding the controversial topic of climate change. He studies the different groups, or discourse coalitions, within the conversation. These include advocates, skeptics and eco-optimists. The advocates are those who believe climate change is a prominent issue and that action must be taken to repair the damage it has done. Skeptics believe quite the opposite, that climate change is a hoax and climate change action is a waste of time and resources. Finally, the eco-optimists are those who believe that evidence of climate change is simply a part of the earths natural cycles, and that the Earth will adapt to the effects humans are having on it over time. Smart studies the conversations and interactions between these parties through mediums such as blog posts. While smart recognizes that science blogs are an important outlet for discussion of science, these discourse coalitions have a difficult time coming together in meaningful discussion and end up in more of a "who is right" argument, rather than either party having an open mind.
This text touches on many topics previously discussed in class. Smart directly references Bazerman, specifically his idea of genre systems, which is where multiple groups use the same outlet for mutually intelligent purposes. However, in Smart's analysis, it seems that the three discourse coalitions are not engaging in meaningful interaction with one another. instead, they are further segregating themselves and their ideas from one another. Additionally, this text makes me think about discourse community vs. discourse coalition. In my opinion, it seems like discourse coalitions are subgroups within a discourse community, separating those within the community based on their opinions. While my final project is not necessarily arguing a point (i.e. organic is better than non-organic), I will definitely need to consider the various opinions and background of my audience, equally appealing to those interested in nature preserves due to their environmental importance, and those who are just looking for something to do on a sunny day. The article I chose to analyze is from Boston Magazine in 2015 titled "How the New England Aquarium Averted the Sea Turtle Apocalypse". As a former employee at the New England Aquarium rescue, I always found this article interesting because it is worded very dramatically. I found it a bit funny back then, but after taking this course, I understand the importance of the techniques used in this article. It begins by setting the scene of a story, focusing on one of the over 600 Kemp's Ridley sea turtles that stranded in Cape Cod that year. The article continues to describe the history of the species and the mass stranding events that led to so many turtles being admitted to the rescue center. While the author delves into the role of the rescue center and specific information about the species, he continues to follow the story of turtle Number 520 throughout the article for continuity.
Along with featuring some fabulous photos of myself, this article features a variety of stylistic techniques. The first paragraph is riddled with very descriptive word choices in order to grasp the audience. "Number 520 is agitated. Scooped from a pool of tepid water by three young staffers on this steamy August morning, Number 520 flails and thrashes as they try to plunge a needle into its leathery neck. The team has only three minutes to get the necessary blood sample". These descriptors help to allow visualization of the situation to grasp the audience's attention and get them to care about Turtle 520, in hopes they will care about the species all together by the end of the article. The author continues to reference this turtle throughout the article, while being sure to introduce new terminology. Additionally, continuing to tell Number 520's story helps to make smooth transitions from one paragraph to another. I have always thought that sounding smart was important in writing, but clearly these methods are much more effective in helping me write well. Enjoy some fun photos of me and turtles here! https://www.bostonmagazine.com/news/2015/10/19/sea-turtles-rescue-new-england-aquarium/ In his work "Caesar's Last Breath", Kean appears to be appealing to a semi-scientific audience. I wouldn't say he is targeting a "general" audience as we have characterized in the past, because in order to understand and enjoy his work, the reader needs to have a basic understanding and an interest in physical and chemical science. However, I wouldn't say the work is targeted towards experts either. While Kean uses some scientific terminology, it is explained at a level that someone without a dedicated science education would be able to understand. This is an interesting audience, as most of the texts I've read have been clearly directed at either scientists or the general public. Kean offers somewhat of a happy medium here.
It seems as though Kean is aiming to foster a strong interest in science in the reader and an understanding as to how science is imperative in the world around them. He does this in a few ways. First off, Kean is able to simplify complex scientific concepts into concise descriptions. He uses scientific terminology, but explains it in a way that is easily understandable by a "beginner". Additionally, Kean conveys the importance and incredible nature of everyday science through telling stories of amazing people. He uses these stories not only to explain things, but to convey how science plays a role in history. I will definitely use some of Kean's techniques in my final project. In order to get people to understand the importance of the Nature Conservancy, they must have some understanding of biology or environmental science. I hope to mimic Kean's method of concisely explaining scientific concepts, however I may have to simplify it a little more for an audience that just wants to take nature walks rather than learn about flora and fauna. I may also pull some quotes to catch peoples' interest.
Introduction The Nature Conservancy is responsible for a multitude of conservation and restorative projects throughout Rhode Island and the world. One of the major roles of the Nature Conservancy is to raise awareness about conservation efforts. One of the best ways to get people to understand conservation and the Nature Conservancy’s work is to get people to visit the nature preserves protected by the organization. Objective The goals of this project are to develop user friendly yet educational website material for four of the Nature Conservancy’s Preserves. Our hope is that by providing the Nature Conservancy with updated photos, feedback and perspectives on these sites, the website can be updated in order to get the public interested in exploring the ecological appeal of these unique areas of Rhode Island. Plan We will start by visiting four Nature Conservancy Preserves. Pocasset Ridge in Tiverton RI currently has no description or photos on the website. The Whitehead Preserve in Little Compton, RI and Carter Preserve in Narragansett, RI will also be visited, which have outdated information currently on the website. Finally, the Aust Familly at Lime Rock in Lincoln, RI is the first preserve to have a woman’s namesake. While visiting these sites, we will document with both words and photographs the unique ecology of the preserves. As biology majors, we are able to understand the importance of the ecology of these sites and, as students in Advanced Writing for the Sciences, we are capable of communicating scientific information in a way that is appealing to the general population. Additionally, as (young people), we are familiar with the types of words and graphics that are eye catching on social media, allowing us to develop website material that will attract an audience of all demographics. Delivery of Material One page of website ready material will be provided for each of the four preserves. This material will include visitor experience, things to do, ecological importance, what makes this site stand out as well as photos taken during our site visits. This material will be written to a general audience, but will clearly convey the unique ecological characteristics of the site in a way that invites the reader to visit. Additionally, we would like to provide four blog posts from our public websites reviewing our firsthand experience at the preserves. With websites like Yelp, Trip Advisor and Google Reviews becoming increasingly important in people’s decision to visit (a place), we believe our first hand accounts may help people decide visiting the preserves is worth the drive. The links to these blogs can be shared on the Nature Conservancy Website, quotes can be taken from these posts, or they can simply be used for the Nature Conservancy to develop their material. Research Background research will be completed for each of the sites. This information will be gathered from local sources such as town and government websites, hiking trail resources, and the current information on the Nature Conservancy website. Additionally, if the Nature Conservancy has any additional information they can provide us with before visiting the preserves, that would be greatly appreciated. Usability testing Upon completion of a first draft, we will ask our peers, professors and family members to review the material and answer questions about what they liked most, what they liked least, and any suggestions they may have on what would make them want to visit these sites. These interviews will be accompanied by an interview with a staff member at the Nature Conservancy. Potential questions include:
Timeline Background research will be completed before visiting each site. All sites will be visited by April 5th, 2018. Following that date, our group will have our first drafts of website material completed by April 12th, 2018. This is when we will complete usability testing. A revised draft will be submitted to the nature conservancy on April 19th, 2018. Revisions per review of the Nature Conservancy will be completed by April 26th. Peer review is one of the most prevalent forms of communication in science. Not only does the peer review process function as communication between the authors and the reviewers, but it allows for common course of action for all scientists wanting to be published, regardless of experience. In this text, I intend to analyze peer review and it's rhetorical characteristics. I will examine the rhetorical devices used by the reviewers as well as how the authors work differs before and after peer review. Additionally, I will discuss how the characteristics of the peer review process promote organized skepticism and universalism equally, and how the peer review process differs between smaller and more prestigious journals.
The structure and organization of this text will be based off of an informational resource for those interested in publishing a scientific paper. The style will be informational. The structure will be similar to a pyramid, starting with broad information about the peer review process, followed by a breakdown of the different steps in the process, and finally a critical analysis of each of those parts. Here are some questions I have: 1. How much time should I spend explaining the details of peer review/how peer reviewers are selected, how the process works? Should I be assuming the scientific community already has a pretty good idea about it? Or should I write it to an audience of people who are interested in entering the field, but are not yet a part of it? 2. I wanted to focus on how peer review improves scientific communication. There are a few different parts to this. Of the following, which is most important?
3. What types of texts should I be analyzing? Peer review protocols published by well known scientific journals? Actual end results? Samples of peer review feedback? In this text, Bazeman delivers an in depth yet easily understandable description of patents as a form of communication in the sciences. He begins by using Thomas Edison as an example. By using a very well known scientist as an example, Bazeman draws the reader in and establishes credibility since the reader already has some idea of what he is talking about. The arrangement of the text is very deliberate, beginning with an intriguing case study of Thomas Edison, then moving into a history of patent laws, followed by an in depth analysis of patents as speech acts. Patents began as a way for people to transfer ideas and knowledge into intellectual property, however when analyzing patents as speech acts, one must consider the identification, interpretation and realization of the act. Essentially, a patent does not solely concern the person acquiring the patent. There are a variety of other parties involved that may interpret the speech act of a patent in a way that was not intended.
This text gives me a lot to think about for my project in particular. While focusing on the balance between the universalism and skepticism in the scientific community, intellectual property is definitely something to think about. As the scientific community strives for inclusion and for those outside the community to have access to science in an understandable way, historically this is not the case. Bazeman touches upon how in Renaissance England, patents were a privilege granted by kings and monarchies. This speaks to how the scientific community was not always as universal as it is today, and how the values of the scientific discourse community are always changing. Patents are used to create intellectual property from ideas. However, it is critical for scientists to share ideas with one another in order to create meaningful discourse within the community. It also creates other incentives such as wealth and fame. How do patents speak against the values of universalism and disinterestedness in science? The genre of scientific writing is highly dependent on the patterns in which scientists communicate. Generally, we communicate our ideas and findings with each other in scientific journals or at conferences where people in a specific subfield confer with one another. These methods help to define the way we communicate, or the discourse, within our community. So the question becomes: what do these typical ways of doing things say about our genre?
For my project, I would like to focus on the Mertonian characteristics of science and how they intersect with each other in scientific discourse today. The four Mertonian characteristics are Universalism, Organized Skepticism, Communism and Disinterestedness. Universalism is the idea that science is open to all, and that the results of experiments are to be judges unbiasedly. This means that whether the results are published by an expert or apprentice, they should be treated equally. Organized skepticism, however, can easily conflict with the idea of universalism. Organized skepticism is the idea that we as scientists should question the results that are produced--including questioning big ideas that are commonly accepted. What if no one ever stood up and said "hey guys, what if the Earth actually ISN'T flat?". So how does the scientific community promote involvement in science while still being critical of published works? Universalism is promoted through things like peer review and conferences. All journals must go through the same peer review process, regardless of rank, providing a skepticism but not on the basis of who is submitting the research. Additionally, conferences are places where students and PhDs alike can join together and discuss their ideas. Communism and disinterestedness go hand in hand as well. Communism is the idea that scientific knowledge must be shared, it is not something to keep to yourself. Keeping scientific knowledge to yourself is like a tree falling in the woods-- if no one hears it, did it ever really happen? Scientific discoveries are produced for the common good and must be shared in order to stimulate new discovery. That means scientists must be disinterested. This means scientists are doing what they do for science, not for themselves or for money or fame. How do we ensure that scientists are in fact disinterested? How do we, as a community, promote the sharing of ideas rather than the ownership of ideas? I would like to interview my thesis advisor, Roxanna Smolowitz to discuss these questions. She has been a research scientist for many years and has published a number of papers. I am hopeful that her insight and my personal research will allow me to examine this topic clearly and thoroughly. |
|