UPDATE: Note that I know very little about this course, so this listing is for information purposes and is not a recommendation. In the comments below, reader AlexY says he is taking this course and has been disappointed with it. Caveat emptor (even though it’s free).
_______
Reader Sajee has informed me that there’s a free online course, “Introduction to Human Evolution,” that started at Wellesley on Sept. 25. I presume it’s not too late to join in, and you can audit it. For more information on the course, or to register, go here.
Here’s the blurb:
ABOUT THIS COURSE
As contemporary humans, we are a product of our evolutionary past. That past can be directly observed through the study of the human fossil record, the materials preserved for archaeological study, and the DNA of living and extinct human populations. This course will provide an overview of human evolutionary history from the present–contemporary human variation in a comparative context–through our last common ancestor with the living great apes, some 5-7 million years in the past. Emphasis will be placed on major evolutionary changes in the development of humans and the methodological approaches used by paleoanthropologists and related investigators to develop that knowledge. The course will begin by asking basic questions about how evolution operates to shape biological variation and what patterns of variation look like in living humans and apes. We will then look at how the human lineage first began to differentiate from apes, the rise and fall of the Australopithecines, the origin and dispersal of the genus Homo, and eventually the radical evolutionary changes associated with the development of agricultural practices in the past 15,000 years. Throughout the course students will be exposed to the primary data, places and theories that shape our understanding of human evolution.
Also Dr. Noor’s excellent Coursera class is starting again in January: https://www.coursera.org/course/geneticsevolution.
One of my favorite videos was a interview with Professor Ceiling Cat, who apparently had a very itchy nose that day.
Jerry, I just started this course on your recommendation, but I feel let down. This is a really badly designed(worded) course.
With examples like these :
True or false: Natural selection chooses evolutionary winners.
Explanation
Natural selection does not “choose” anything. Nor are evolutionary “winners” predetermined. Those traits that provide organisms with a fitness advantage at a given time, in a given environment, are more likely to be represented in subsequent generations. As a result, the action of selection is only something we can understand after the fact…it is not a forward looking process.
—–
“Choosing” could easily be a metaphor for survival of relevant genes and so forth.
Many other questions in this course are just like this!
I like that question and the explanation. However, I could possibly be tripped up by it on a test, I wouldn’t complain because some people actually think there is agency in the selection and I would be happy that the distinction was being made.
I guess I’ll sign up to see if the “many other questions” suit me as well.
John Hawks has a course coming up in October – https://www.coursera.org/course/humanevolution
Based on his blog contents and his background it is likely going to be good.
Sorry – that course is starting Jan, not Oct.
Yes, I signed up for that a few weeks back…hoping it turns out to be a good experience.
As the professor for the above mentioned course I wanted to chime in. First, thanks for posting about the course. It has been an interesting first week, and is my first experience with the MOOC format. Teaching 19,000 students is definitely different than teaching 19 or even 190.
Second, as to the specific comments of AlexY, I would recommend reserving judgement on the first week. Not that I think the first week was bad, but the first week is necessarily superficial and introductory. As to the specifics of his complaint, from my experience in teaching evolution, the phrasing of natural selection as an active, forward acting force, is one of the most common paths to misinterpreting evolution through a teleological lens. The question you cite was intended to raise this issue. The phrase, “natural selection chooses winners,” sets up natural selection as an active agent with intent, which it is not. Certainly active forces (e.g. predation) contribute to selection, but selection itself is a product of what has happened not what will happen.
Anyway, I hope you stick with the course and would certainly welcome anyone interested in the topic to join in, as well. I’d also second the recommendation of John Hawks’ course. John is a good friend and colleague and I know that his course is going to be quite differently structured from my own, hopefully making the two quite complimentary.
Thank you so much for replying in person.
Now again I am not actually critisizing the course itself, but if you look on the discussion page there are MANY people posting multiple threads about MANY of the frustrating questions.
Here is one post :
Gwen45:
I’m finding some of the lecture material and many of the study and homework questions to be very frustrating. I have no trouble at all understanding the course content. Most of what has been presented so far isn’t new to me. But many of the questions are unclear or ambiguous and you’re forced to guess at what’s really being asked. The language of some of the lectures seems very convoluted, overly academic, and indirect. The section on natural selection is an example that comes to mind. But the issues with the questions gives me the most concern. I would suggest that the staff devote more time to these and perhaps take a more active role in evaluating them and rewriting.
I am very interested in primate/human evolution – I plan on graduate studies in the same field.
I sincerely hope that some of these hard to understand questions are addressed and hope that they are selected against in the future.
Thanks again for the great course!
The class has 19000 students, many of whom are new to EdX, and many of whom have either not yet reached college or left it 40 years ago. There is going to be some adjustment. Many of the complaints were focused on questions that aren’t graded, and are there to get students thinking about the issues raised by the question and answers, more than what answer is “correct.”
Given the content of the first week (overview of Anthro, overview of basic evolution), I think the first week went impressively smoothly.
Initially I found the questions tricky. Then in fact I decided they were well constructed and provoked quite a lot of thought. The good thing is that once the answers are revealed the thinking behind the question also becomes clear and makes sense. It’s just a case of getting the hang of the methodology.
I do think it may be more difficult for non-native English speakers as some of the subtlety may be missed.
Anyway, I am loving the course. I left my zoology degree behind 33 years ago and it’s wonderful to be “back” and in particular appreciating how the subject area generally has developed over the years and influenced by modern techniques and thinking.
Reblogged this on The Road.
I am on this course, and am really enjoying it. The first week has been more about evolution in general, giving students the necessary tools to apply later on. Not everyone is going to be as experienced in understanding evolution as the regulars of WEIT, so I think that the lecturer has done a great job in trying to get them “up to speed”. Many students want to learn more about evolution, and I’ve made some suggestions in the discussion forums, with WEIT being top of my list.
Reblogged this on π's blog.