As I’ve created bioblitzes, and then analyzed the results, I’ve become interested in WHO is making the observations. Given the fact that users don’t have to supply any real identifying information in their profile, it’s hard to say much about them. However, it’s been my general experience that we are not reaching younger people. And, even when they do participate, the quality of their observations leaves a lot to be desired.
What if we created school, school district, state, regional and/or national Biodiversity Halls of Fame to get young people seriously engaged, especially those students who love the environment but typically have no way to gain some social standing among their peers? I think some starting criteria would be: 1) the number of Research Grade observations of unique species, 2) a minimum number of different taxa, and 3) helping to organize/administer a bioblitz.
I think something like this would definitely reward cooperation over competition, but would also allow for a healthy type of competition to occur. Grades could challenge grades; schools could challenge schools; districts could challenge districts; states could challenge states to see how many children in various grades could make at least one Research Grade observation.
We might even be able to help promote the creation of school-based Biodiversity Clubs, and maybe even a national Biodiversity Corps.
I have lots of other ideas to share, if anyone would like to continue this discussion.
One of the good things about iNat is that our ages vary across the decades. From kids with mum to 70s and 80s. High school kids have a good reputation on iNat - the Danko brothers on flies, started young on iNat. Cream rises to the top, the good ones find their village, their tribe, on iNat. And the old ones pass on their knowledge to the next, and the next, generations.
I’m not at al worried about the demographic on iNat skewing older, if that is what’s happening. After all, as a hobby, iNat isn’t all that different from birdwatching, hiking, and bug pinning, which all skew older. I think the younger people who are interested in doing stuff on iNat won’t have any trouble finding it, and that it’s probably not worth trying to reach out to anyone who’s not already enthusiastic about what’s happening over here.
Yeah, I am not a fan of the competition part. I think that is where we end up with problems in observations that can’t be sorted out later, or are a pain to sort out later.
I completely understand the concern. However, these students would know that their observations were going to get extra scrutiny, so the likelihood of cheating, at least over the long term, diminishes. Having peers to look up to, and emulate, encourages better contributions and a deeper connection to their environment. Especially, IMHO, if the bioblitzes were done at the EPA Level III ecoregional level.
I had the wonderful opportunity to have lunch with Scott Loarie at a NatureServe conference. He liked the idea. So, with my upcoming South Central Plains Biodiversity Challenge, in conjunction with the indoor bioblitz training I’ll be doing at schools, I’m going to test the idea.
As I said in another post, I don’t disagree. But, again as I suggested, if the students are trained in indoor/mock bioblitzes that show how to make Research Grade observations, and then they influence others, I think you wind up with a much more interested, skilled and dedicated cadre of users. Just an idea. Nothing else seems to be actively engaging young people, or diminishing the number of low quality observations.
Thank you. I’m going to test it with high school and college aged students in my area.
Perhaps it would be interesting to see where the users who responded were from, and how they came to be users. Perhaps some regions/organizations are doing better than others? If so, maybe we should try to replicate their success?
As an aside, for the 106 projects I created 3x a year for the Northern Rocky Mountain Biodiversity Challenge, I identified the top users in each jurisdiction. I then divided the number of observers by the population to come up with a number that I called the “Ecosystem Engagement Index”. Then I sorted them. It became obvious, quickly, that some areas had a greater percentage of users. The question I haven’t had time to answer is Why? I think it would make an interesting research project.
Please see my response to DianaStuder. Both. Of course, this is in my experience, but I’ve created 2 ecoregional projects: Northern Rocky Mountain Biodiversity Challenge (106) and now the South Central Plains Biodiversity Challenge (102). Both are multijurisdictional. And I’ve given presentations to local, state, regional and national conferences.
I would say ‘more engaged’ is two things. Good mentors and active identifiers first. Second a clear impression that obs are thoughtful (in focus, field marks, follow notifications, help to ID - tick all the boxes)
I like your passion to engage younger folks. Is going through the schools the best way? I have thoughts about that which I’ve sprinkled liberally throughout the Educator Forum across various topics.
If you really want to see this idea move forward, the way to go would be to connect with the City Nature Challenge and perhaps the Great Southern BioBlitz. I think teachers who are participating in these events might like to create a project and join an umbrella project of other schools/teachers.
But be warned that what you are suggesting is a lot of work. A lot of work. It’s not clear when you say What if we created who the we is. I’m sure Allison et al can tell you exactly what all is involved in trying to coordinate a global project, herding cats people to properly create and populate their projects.
I suspect it may depend on your locale/region and typical subject matter of interest. This is purely anecdotal, but I’ve only been actively using iNat for maybe a year and I’ve made several friends through my interest in Florida botany. The generational spread skews Gen Z which has been very surprising to me. It does seem a point of interest, at least with some, to document as many rare and endemic taxa as possible in a sort of pseudo-competitive way, so what you’re suggesting doesn’t sound too far off the mark, but gamifying that seems tricky. I almost think the existing infrastructure here with projects is sufficient (or at least a good starting point) if we can get folks more engaged with them.
Thank you very much for your reply. I’d welcome an opportunity to explore this more with you.
One reason, actually the reason I’ve set up a separate ecoregional challenge is because the CNC is now discouraging competition of this sort, probably rightfully so for all the reasons that have been discussed in the CNC organizers meetings. As a long time CNC organizer, I applaud all the work they have done, and their continued efforts to improve engagement, and I plan to continue to organize CNC projects that follow their new guidance.
I’ll be giving 2 presentations at a state and national meeting gauge interest in establishing school-based Biodiversity Halls of Fame. Believe me: I know it would be a lot of work, but then setting up so many projects over the last 5 years has also been a lot of work.
And, certainly, it was a lot of work to get climate science put into the curriculum, and for a national Climate Corps to be created. I just find it alarming that so few students can identify species that they share the landscape with; seem to know nothing about the TES species in their jurisdictions; seem to care nothing about knowing the species that have actually already been extirpated. And, as a member of an IUCN CEM Thematic Group, it’s shocking at how little students know about the IPBES, IUCN, or the World Conservation Congress,
And all this is set against the accelerating social cues that students are getting over NIL that sports (and the inherent celebrated competition between individual and schools) is the only thing that matters. Why is it inappropriate to keep trying to find a way to get students engaged with their ecosystems/ecoregions; to try to rebalance the focus to fighting to preserve Nature? I have lots of thoughts on why this is so (i.e., our focus in land use planning on Natural Resources vs Natural Heritage).
I’ve already created the projects for teachers within the SPC ecoregion. I believe all they would have to do is mention the possibility of being inducted into a new Biodiversity Hall of Fame, then just get out of the way. The students will self-organize.
Thank you dsandii for your comments. I struggle with the potential gamification aspect of the proposal. But, typically, the “games” involve beating someone else. This would simply be a way to reward and acknowledge young people for making a contribution to an understanding of their environment…maybe even creating an “environmental hero”. There are other examples of Conservation Halls of Fame for adults; people who are recognized for a lifetime of work. The school-based Halls of Fame are just trying to lay down some tracks for young people to easily begin a lifetime of service to the conservation and the environment.
For me personally, this runs into the gamification problem.
I really object to gamification of things, and online iNat is one of the few places that has retained some level of distance from that, although there is still already quite a bit of it here.
I’d rather have people participating for the desire to learn, contribute, interest, etc than have some reward and tier system that brings people in just so that they can ‘score’ higher than others.
I agree. Creating Hall of Fame type competition has previously incentivised mass cheating. Last year’s City Nature Challenge was a nightmare in localities that both sold it as a competition, and mass-incentivised school children to participate.