Campus Ecologist

Volume II, Number 1, 1984

General Ecology:
An Opportunity for Cross-Fertilization

James Banning

The disciplines of psychology and education have served as the basic foundation for the conceptualization and practice of student personnel work. While these disciplines have served well, the general discipline of ecology can serve as an opportunity for cross-fertilization with concepts stemming from the traditional fields of psychology and education. One of the functions The Campus Ecologist hopes to serve is to be both a stimulus and a disseminator of the "cross fertilization" of traditional ecological concepts and the practice of campus student personnel work.

The following examples illustrate the potential of this cross-fertilization:

Ecosystem
An ecosystem is a functioning interacting system composed of one or more living organisms "biome" and their effective environment, both physical and biological (Fosberg, 1963). Is the campus an ecosystem? What are the boundaries of the campus ecosystem? Some ecologists speculate that specific ecosystems may have distinctive emergent properties and undergo evolutionary change after the fashion of individual species (Margalef, 1968). What about developing universities? What are the unique emergent properties? Can these be supportive of student development?

Ecosystem resilience
Ecosystem resilience determines the persistence of relationships within a system and is the measure of the ability of these systems to absorb changes of state variables, and parameters, and still persist (Holling, 1973). How resilient is the campus to changes in student enrollment and/or student types?

Ecosystem stability
Ecosystem stability is the ability of the system to return to an equilibrium state after a temporary disturbance (Holling, 1973). Are some residence halls more stable than others? What are the conditions that relate to ecosystem stability?

Carrying capacity
Carrying capacity is the maximum population that a particular environment can support indefinitely without leading to degradation (Ellen, 1982). What are the carrying capacities of the subenvironment on campus, i.e. class size, residence hall capacity, and leadership opportunities? What is the relationship of carrying capacity to outcomes in student development? What are the support limits for a campus environment?

Ecological niche
Ecological niche represents the adaptive match between circumstances of the environment and the species schema (Hunt, 1961). Within a campus environment can ecological niches be found and identified? Are there different niches for different students? Can campus ecological niches be designed? What are the characteristics of an ecological niche that foster student growth and development?

Niche width
Niche width refers to the amount of different resources used and the extent to which each is relied upon by the organism within the ecological niche (Hardesty, 1975). Do different student populations consume resources at different rates? Do campus "widths" differ? Can we measure campus niche widths?

Proximics
Proximics represent the study of the interrelated observations and theories of man's use of space as a specialized elaboration of culture (Hall, 1969). How do college students use physical space? In what ways do the physical environments of our campuses mold the development of students?

Territoriality
The concept of territoriality entails the acquisition, demarcation, and defense of a spatial area with related dimension of implied ownerships, personalization, and maximum control (Schroeder, 1977). How does the concept of territoriality impact our residence halls? Are behavior problems related to issues of territoriality?

Behavioral Sink
Calhoun (1962) coined the term behavioral sink to designate the gross distortions of behavior that appear to be the outcome when an unusually large number of animals are collected together. Are behaviors often observed in dorms related to a behavior sink phenomena? Are the gross behaviors often associated with campus "Greek towns" related to this phenomena?

References:
Calhoun, J.B. "A 'Behavioral Sink'." In E.L. Bliss(Ed.) Roots of Behavior. New York: Harper & Brothers, 1962.
Ellen, Roy. Environment, Subsistence, and System. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982.
Fosberg, F.R. (Ed.) Man's Place in The Island Ecosystem. Honolulu: Bernice P. Bishop Museum, 1963.
Hall, E.T. The Hidden Dimension. New York: Anchor Books, 1969.
Hardesty, D.L. "The niche concept: suggestions for its use in studies of human ecology." Human Ecology 3 (1975), pp. 71-85.
Holling, C.S. "Resilience and stability of ecological systems." Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 4 (1973), pp. 1-23.
Hunt, J.M. Intelligence and Experience. New York: Ronald Press, 1961.
Margalef, Ramon. Perspectives in Ecological Theory. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1968.
Schroeder, C.C. Student Development Through Environment Management. Paper presented at the conference of the Association of College and University Housing officers Lexington Kentucky, JUNE 1977.

Dynamics of the Environment

James Banning

A properly structured environment provides for a full range of dynamic processes which may be built in for the accomplishment of specific purposes. These environmental mechanisms are consciously designed to produce specified behavior changes in students who reside within them.

An environment may be designed that:

Involves

Provokes or calls for interaction. It appeals to the student's curiosity and natural interest. Movement, color, sound, and light capture attention and invite manipulation. It is appropriate for the bored student.

Manages

Provides a highly structured routine and sequence of activities. The time is tightly scheduled leaving little opportunity for disruptive random activity. The teacher is a manager and the student is a worker. It is appropriate for the student who needs close supervision.

Enriches

Provides a diversity of learning opportunities. Emphasis is upon variety of approach and generalization of learning across situations. Facts are not taught in isolation, but are examined in a many-faceted reality. It is appropriate for potentiating creativity and remediating learning disabilities, as well as reaching the "normal" child.

Reorganizes

Provides incentives for the student to alter his/her behavior patterns. The old environment supports for maladaptive behavior are discontinued and payoffs are arranged for the desired new behavior. A behavior modification approach is suggested. It is appropriate for any student whose behavior you wish to reorganize.

Suppresses

Provides punishment for undesirable student behavior or eliminates emotionally disturbing stimuli from the pupil's external sensory input. Once "trigger stimuli" are identified, they are eliminated or neutralized. It is appropriate for destructive behavior (punishment) or rage (elimination of trigger stimuli).

Augments

Amplifies any desirable quality possessed by the student. Existing strengths are focused upon and expanded to the limit of the student's potential. Since skills and abilities are interrelated, any competence that is expanded sufficiently will cut across several disciplines. It may thus be possible to move a student from an existing area of high interest into areas of low interest as these become involved. It is useful for the "nonacademic" student.

Prompts

Provides repetition and drill. Teaching machines may develop the student's mastery of rote material. It is useful for students who need constant repetition, and it frees the teacher from this task. If the teaching machine is "fun," learning takes place as an artifact of play.

Facilitates

Provides the necessary vehicles for the expression of developed qualities in the student. A profile of student interests and abilities is matched with environmental facilitation. Often students have developed abilities for which the environment provides no possibility of expression. These abilities then lie dormant or may atrophy. It is appropriate for all students.

Potentiates

Makes possible the development of unknown qualities whic exist only as potentials in the student. These may be uncovered in a process of systematic exploration. Once discovered they may be augmented and facilitated. This is appropriate for all students. Its goal is attainment of the limits set by heredity and early environment.

Stresses

Subjects the student to anxiety-provoking stimuli. It is useful for mobilization of a student and may facilitate performance if kept at low levels.

Isolates

Reduces the interpersonal or interobject relationships of the student. The range or intensity of external stimuli may be lowered to any desirable level. It may be useful for the easily distractible student.

Compensates

Makes up for a deficit in student functioning. With proper environmental compensation, a student disability will not become a handicap. It is appropriate for any student who deviates markedly from the range of normal functioning on any dimension.

Monitors

Provides continuing feedback on a student's behavior, particularly his/her reactions to environmental stimuli. In this way an individual program may be designed and adjusted as necessary for the accomplishment of predetermined goals. A monitoring process is necessary for all students.

(Source: Leland Kaiser, personal communication.)

Ways to Observe the Campus Environment

James Banning

In observing a campus environment, it is helpful to have a series of questions or "benchmarks" to guide the observational process. Examples of such benchmarks are as follows:

1. Observe behavior:

What people do and where?

2. Observe physical cues:

What are the remnants of use?
How is the environment used as a medium of communication?
How has the environment been adapted?
How is the environment used to display self?

3. Observe the functional aspects of the environment:

What is the relationship of the elements of the environment to the following functions: security and shelter, social contact, symbolic identification, task instrumentality, pleasure, and growth?
(Source: Steele, F. Physical Settings and Organization Development. Reading, Massachusetts: Addison-Weseley Publishing Company, 1973.)

4. Observe the common relationships:

What are the relationships among things vs. things; things vs. people, people vs. people.
What are the features in the environment? Are they fixed, semi-fixed or non-fixed?
(Source: Rapoport, Amos. The Meaning of the Built Environment. Beverly Hills, California: Sage Publications, 1982.)

Resource References: General Ecology

Abbot, Joan M.W. "Cultural anthropology and the man- environment relationship: an historical discussion." Kroeber Anthropological Society Papers. 43 (1970): 1031.
Alihan, M.A. Social Ecology: A Critical Analysis. New York: Columbia University Press, 1938.
Baker, P.T. "The application of ecological theory to anthropology." American Anthropologist 64 (1962): 1421.
Barker, P.G. Ecological Psychology: Concepts and Methods for Environment of Human Behavior. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1968.
Bennett, J.N. The Ecological Transition: Cultural Anthropology and Human Adaptation. New York: Pergamon Press, 1976.
Benthall, J. ed. Ecology in Theory and Practice. New York: Viking Press, 1972.
Bews, J.W. Human ecology. London: Oxford University Press, 1935.
Bookchin, M. Toward an Ecological Society. Montreal: Black Rose Books, 1981.
Boughey, A. Fundamental Ecology. London: Intext, 1971.
Calhoun, J.B. "Population density and social pathology." Science American 206 (1962): 1399-1408.
Clements, F.E. and V.E. Shelford. Bioecology. New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1939.
Cloud, Preston. "Evolution of ecosystems." American Science 62 (1974): 54-66.
Darling, F.F. "The ecological approach to the social sciences." American Scientist. 39 (1951): 244-54.
Dice, Lee R. Mans Nature and Natures Man: The Ecology of fluman Communities. Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press, 1955.
Dow, James. "System models of cultural ecology." Social Science Information 15 (6) (1976): 953-76.
Duncan, O.D. "Social organization and the ecosystem." In Feris, ed. Handbook of Modern Sociology. Chicago: Rand McNally, 1964.
Ehrlich, Paul R. The Population Bomb. New York: Ballantine Books, 1968.
Evans, Francis C. "Ecosystem as the basic unit in ecology." Science 123 (1956): 1127-1128.
Hardesty, D.L. "The Niche Concept: suggestions for its use in studies of human ecology." Human Ecology 3 (1975): 71 85.
Helm, J. "The ecological approach in anthropology." American Journal of Sociology 67 (1962): 630-639.
Honingmann, J.J. (Ed) Handbook of Social and Cultural Anthropology. Chicago: Rand McNally, 1973.
Little, M.A. and G.E.B. Morren. Ecology Energetics and Human Variability. Dubarque: William Brown, 1977.
MacArthur, Robert. Ceographical Ecology. New York: Harper & Row, 1972.
Margalef, Ramon. Perspectives in Ecological Theory. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1968.
Odum, Eugene P. Fundamentals of Ecology. Philadelphia: Saunders, 1971.
Odum, Eugene P. Ecology: The Link Between the Natural and Social Sciences. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston 1975.
Odum, H.T. Environment, Power and Society. New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1971.
Sangster, R.P. Ecology: A Selected Bibliography. Monticello 111.: Council of Planning Librarians Exchange Bibliography, 1971.
Sells, S.B. "Ecology and the Science of Psychology." Multivariate Behavior Research I (1966): 131-144.
Van Dyne, G.M. ed. The Ecosystem Concept in Natural Resources Management. New York: Academic Press, 1969.
Vayda, A.P. and R. Rappoport. "Ecology, culture and noncultural." In Clifton, J. ed. Introduction to Cultural Anthropology. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin, 1968.
Whittaker, R.H.; S.A. Levin; and R.B. Root. "Niche, habitat and ecotype." American Nat. 107 (955) (1973): 321-338.
Wiens, J.A. ed. Ecosystem Structure and Function. Oregon State University Press, 1972.

This material resides on an Indiana State University server and is maintained by Will Barratt.
Please forward any problems and comments to him.