EDUCATION CONNECTION
Teaching General Entomology
to Disinterested Undergraduates
David Rivers
T
eaching general entomology at an
institution like Loyola College, where
undergraduate education is of prime
importance, is very rewarding, but it can
also be incredibly challenging. Like most
private and many public liberal arts schools,
students intent on a biology major usually
arrive on campus with the desire to pursue
a health career, more specifically, the ambition of becoming a “doctor.” Consequently,
these students choose a curricular path that
is focused on “premedical” courses, with a
keen interest in any course containing “human” in the title.
Curricular requirements imposed by
the department (we encourage breadth of
knowledge and skills) that deviate from this
narrow route tend to be viewed by many (not
all) students as pointless, if not worthless.
Thus, most students grudgingly complete
the requirements for the biology major, with
their least desirable courses coming from
the Population Biology sector. This just so
happens to be where my General Entomology course is housed. In fact, all upper-level
courses that are commonly referred to as
survey courses (that is, courses that emphasize the morphology, taxonomy, life cycles,
and natural histories of whole organisms)
have been lumped together in the Population category. An alarming trend is sweeping
through biology programs across the nation:
these survey courses, those particularly focused on plants and invertebrate animals,
are disappearing. They are disappearing
from biology curricula because students are
avoiding such courses, largely out of lack of
interest in the topics and because many students believe that the content is not relevant
to their career paths. In response, biology
24
programs are forced to drop the courses due
to low enrollments, and many departments
have elected to stop offering such courses
altogether, citing a variety of reasons (Wilcove and Eisner 2000). The result is that it
is now possible for many students across the
nation to obtain an undergraduate biology
degree with only minimal or no exposure to
the biology of the plants and animals that
dominate the planet. An understanding and
appreciation of natural history is being lost
from a whole generation, and there is no
indication that the problem is being resolved
(Wilcove and Eisner 2000).
Using my undergraduate general entomology course, I describe my approaches
to addressing and overcoming these pedagogical problems. My solution has been to
design an integrated course that combines
some elements of a traditional introductory
entomology course with a variety of nontraditional and hands-on experiences. The
result, I believe, is a course that students
thoroughly enjoy, leading to increased motivation to learn and understand the concepts
of insect biology specifically, and, more
broadly, natural history.
component was set up for study of the morphology and taxonomy of insects, and field
trips were used as an opportunity to develop
an insect collection. Over the past 3 years, I
have introduced short (1- or 2-wk long) inquiry-based activities to examine such topics
as feeding behavior, limb regeneration, and
reproductive strategies.
Typically, students majoring in biology
enroll in the General Entomology course
during their sophomore or junior year. The
course was designed for upper-level students
who have a significant background in biological principles (usually two years worth
of courses) and have finished a two-semester
biology sequence on experimental design and
analysis. Most of the students plan to attend
medical school or obtain graduate training
upon graduation. Consequently, the course
is filled with very bright, highly motivated
students. Despite these attributes, however,
most students enroll in the course because of
the instructor’s reputation or personality or
because they were closed out of their initial
course choices during registration, and not
because they have a genuine interest in the
topics or techniques of entomology.
Teaching Methods
General entomology at Loyola College
is a one-semester course that was originally
designed to provide undergraduate students
an introduction to the morphology, classification, life cycles, behavior, and ecology
of insects, with special reference given to
the more common species that affect humans. Lectures have been traditional (e.g.,
teacher-centered, didactic), with an emphasis
placed on phylogeny and the biology of the
most common insect orders. The laboratory
The Curricular Problem
Generally speaking, biology students at
institutions, such as Loyola College, lack
an interest in survey courses and, to a lesser
extent, field-oriented classes. This disinterest
may have a specific origin with reference to
invertebrates: students initially avoid the entomology course at Loyola because they are
“grossed out” or annoyed by insects, and/or
they are “scared to death” of spiders and
insects that bite or sting. (Spiders are cited
most often, usually by individuals who do
American Entomologist • Spring 2006
not know that there is a difference between
a “spider” and an “insect.”)
These comments stem from conversations
with my students over the past 10 years.
Among the undergraduates who have made
these statements, almost all have indicated
that they were raised in an urban environment and spent minimal time outdoors,
excluding sporting and exercise activities.
There are exceptions, of course, to these observations, particularly in departments that
offer an environmental science or ecology
program. Nonetheless, the impact of disinterested students on shaping the curricula of
science programs can and has been profound
(National Science Foundation 1998, Rothman and Narum 1999, Wilcove and Eisner
2000). Thus, Loyola College is not alone in
facing the problems with survey courses.
Perpetuating the issues associated with
student disinterest is the fact these courses
have changed very little in terms of pedagogical approaches in the classroom. Most
introductory or general entomology courses
are good examples of the pedagogical
problems associated with whole-organism,
survey courses. The lectures and laboratories (including field experiences) have
focused on the traditional content-driven
topics of morphology, taxonomy, and life
cycles. Active learning approaches in the
classroom have been rare in these courses
at most institutions. In fact, this is perhaps
the most important aspect to recognize with
the curricular deficiency: educational reform
has swept through biology programs in the
United States, but not all subdisciplines in
the life sciences have participated.
Active learning approaches have been
introduced to supplant or augment passive
techniques (National Science Foundation
1996, McNeal and D’Avanzo 1997). Integrating lecture and laboratory experiences
has been encouraged, rather than using laboratories to merely reinforce lecture ideas and
facts, or to perform “cookbook” exercises
(National Research Council 1996, 1998).
Courses in areas such as physiology and
molecular biology, and even introductory
biology classes, have seen most of the pedagogical changes (Rothman and Narum 1999,
Conference Report 2001). Field and survey
courses are just now being considered. This
represents not only a considerable deficit
in any program’s ability to provide a thorough education to students in the fields of
organismal and population biology, but it
also means that such courses are not likely
to pique students’ interest and curiosity.
Perhaps it is most devastating to realize that
general entomology courses have remained
teacher-centered, predominantly using didactic lecture styles that are content-driven
and focusing on topics known to not engage
American Entomologist • Volume 52, Number 1
many undergraduate students, which may be
contributing to our students’ lack of interest
and appreciation of the natural history of
all organisms.
In my opinion, a response from our discipline is required to address the changing
face of undergraduate science education.
For me, I chose to abandon the approaches
used when I was a student and develop an
integrated course that gives priority to elevating student intellectual interest, motivation,
and curiosity toward insect biology and
natural history.
The Solution?
Higher science education at colleges and
universities across the nation has undergone
a revolution over the past decade. Faculty in
science, math, engineering, and technology
courses have been changing the way they
teach, and student behaviors and attitudes
toward science are driving the reform (National Science Foundation 1996, Rothman
and Narum 1999). A common theme being
Other than
bee pollination,
these students typically
cannot name any
positive influences
that insects have
on the
human condition.
brought to science courses is that active approaches to learning, such as inquiry and
team problem-solving, are central not only to
the process of science, but also to the learning of science (Rothman and Narum 1999,
National Research Council 2000). Most
educators agree that the science classroom,
whether it be a lecture, laboratory, or field
setting, should promote positive student
attitudes including curiosity and interest,
independent thinking, and basic and integrated process skills (Leonard 1983, McNeal
and D’Avanzo 1997). In short, students need
and want the opportunity to be engaged
and active in their learning (National Science Foundation 1998, National Research
Council 2000): to do science rather than just
learn about science.
To achieve such needed, yet ambitious
goals, changes in how science is taught
and what is taught in science classes must
occur at all levels in a curriculum, from
the introductory principles or foundations
courses through the more narrowly focused
upper-level courses. The “classroom” must
be integrated, where distinctions between
lecture and laboratory are blurred, and learning becomes student-active and no longer
teacher-centered. Science education reform
is in motion; and continued changes are not
only still needed, but are being mandated
from private and government agencies, as
well as from industry and educational institutions (National Research Council 1996;
National Science Foundation 1996, 1998;
Rothman and Narum 1999).
Nowhere is the need for science education
reform better illustrated than in the survey
courses. Most biology majors at undergraduate institutions avoid these courses,
regardless of whether their preconceptions of
entomology and other disciplines are correct
or not, and many remain disinterested during
and after the course.
Has anyone even considered this issue
when evaluating enrollments in graduate
entomology programs or the declining
membership of ESA? My guess is probably
not. Traditional approaches alone are no
longer working in the entomology classroom
for most undergraduate students; change is
needed. So what can been done?
Instructors of general entomology courses
need to identify students’ attitudes about
insects, for example, and then develop course
topics in a manner that makes connections
with these attitudes. I use traditional and
nontraditional topics, exercises, and handson experiences in my course at Loyola College as a means to make connections with
student interests and maintain integrity of
content (Table 1).
I take into account that for most students
(and the public at large), insects are identified as creatures that buzz around at picnics,
landing on food or taking a plunge into cans
of soda; that destroy our food by attacking
crops or invading a kitchen pantry; and that
vector many devastating diseases to humans,
pets, and livestock. Other than bee pollination, these students typically cannot name
any positive influences that insects have
on the human condition. The take-home
message is that the instructor must perhaps
work harder in these courses than in others
to develop topics or teaching approaches to
reach students who generally do not have an
interest in insects.
To have vocational relevance to students
with interests predominantly centered on
health careers, I have also incorporated a
number of activities focused on developing
learning and technical skills associated with
any career in biology (Table 2). My goal is
to help students acquire skills that will help
them mature as biologists and adults, and
that are useful in their continued education
at Loyola and beyond and that will help
prepare them for their chosen careers.
25
Table 1. Traditional and Nontraditional Topics or Approaches Used in General Entomology
at Loyola College
Classification
Approach or topic
(traditional vs. nontraditional)
Examination of internal and external morphology through dissections
Field trips for insect collecting
Traditional
Traditional
Term paper on insects shaping the human condition/civilizations
Nontraditional
Forensic entomology: simulation of crime scene investigation
Nontraditional
Student teaching: insect behavior lectures and demonstrations
Nontraditional
Insect reproductive biology and strategies: discussions
and demonstrations
Both
Cockroach journal: students raise a hissing cockroach in dorm room
and maintain daily journal
Nontraditional
Cockroach races: students investigate insect locomotion independently
and then race cockroaches on last day of class
(Madagascar Madness: Running of the Roaches)
Nontraditional
Insect pest case studies
Nontraditional
Electronic field guides: students develop Web-based field guides
targeting elementary and middle school audiences
Nontraditional
Natural history project: includes small insect collections and use of
10 specimens as center-piece of a natural history story
Nontraditional
Other topics are addressed throughout the semester, but the above list includes the activities or topics that seem to
be most successful in engaging students.
The syllabus is not rigid. The topics that
can be explored are endless, and I encourage
the students to make suggestions throughout
the semester on topics or ideas that they want
to discuss. With different student attitudes
and suggestions each term, the course is
not always the same from one year to the
next. Obviously, the instructor must be flexible to accommodate this approach to the
classroom, but the benefits are well worth
it. Topics introduced by or from students
give them the opportunity to own the course
and their own education. This ownership
promotes greater connection to other topics
through increased motivation, a feature that
is essential to learning.
What are the educational approaches
that can be used to develop the essential
learning skills for biology and for entomology specifically? The course does not have a
formal laboratory period. Rather, each topic
is presented in the most appropriate setting,
whether that is a classroom for a traditional
lecture, a seminar room for a student-led discussion, or a laboratory or field for hands-on
experiences. The classroom is integrated with
the topic or skill to be developed. For some of
the basic material about insect biology (i.e.,
body plans and morphology), I use didactic
(traditional) lectures and hands-on experiences. For example, 2–3 class meetings are
dedicated to examining a variety of insects
with generalized and specialized body plans
and dissecting fresh specimens. As the class
performs such techniques, I have the chance
to discuss the internal and external anatomy
26
of these insect groups, and to discuss the ethical use of animals in dissections and experiments. I do not use separate lectures on such
topics. Using this approach, students can see
and touch while reading and hearing about
body plans, morphology, and so forth, and
ultimately place ideas, terms, and concepts
in a tangible biological context.
Students also have the chance to explore
topics of interest independently and in small
groups; they then present the information
to the class in formats used by professional
biologists. For example, as a mechanism
to explore insect behavior in unique ways,
students work as pairs to select a series of
related behaviors to study over a relatively
short time (2–3 wk). Live insects are either
collected or ordered so that the students can
observe the behaviors, then develop a brief
lecture and hands-on demonstration for the
class. As a part of this peer education, students write exam questions to evaluate their
classmates’ understanding of the presented
material. This activity alone has elevated
student ownership for the course.
In another exercise, each student works
independently to investigate an insect pest
problem associated with agriculture, livestock, human disease, building structure,
urban settings, or simply nuisance pests,
and to outline potential solutions. In this
project, students may visit local areas or
facilities that must confront insect pests, and
they interview members of the community
who deal with and/or solve the insect pest
problems. They may also talk with research
scientists working in basic and applied research geared toward pest management. This
endeavor requires the students to critically
evaluate the problem; research the literature to understand the insect, the damage
inflicted, and the types of control measures
that have been used; assess what has worked
and what has not; and attempt to learn why
they have not worked. Each student is asked
to develop fresh insight into possible new
approaches that achieve the desired outcome
of pest control. The project is also amenable
to a small-group effort, but I have not tried
it in this format.
Table 2. Educational Objectives of General Entomology Course at Loyola College.
After the completion of the course, each student will be able
I.
To describe and define what an “insect” is and explain as well as diagram the
insect and arthropod body plan;
II.
To understand the ecological roles of insects in different ecosystems;
III.
To develop and use independent and critical thinking skills, particularly in a
contextual situation;
IV.
To develop and improve observation skills;
V.
To work cooperatively with large or small groups of students to complete projects;
VI.
To define biological diversity and natural history and develop an appreciation of
insects in relation to humankind;
VII.
To explain the global impact of insects on human existence based on disease
transmission and agricultural losses;
VIII.
To collect and identify insects for study using a range of aquatic, aerial and
terrestrial field collecting techniques;
IX.
To preserve specimens for museum study;
X.
To develop and improve writing skills for scientific communication; and will
XI.
Be more interested and curious about insects and natural history.
Assessment measures used in the course are designed to evaluate the development of desired learning skills or
outcomes.
American Entomologist • Spring 2006
As a final initiative, students individually
collect and identify 20 insect specimens from
the local region. (I know, the size of the insect
collection should lead to me being flogged by
respectable entomologists everywhere!) In
fact, as the semester progresses, the class participates in field excursions to learn collecting
techniques and identification skills. The next
step is for each student to select 10 of these
collected specimens for telling a natural history story (see the sidebar for details). The
story to be told is entirely up to the students.
It is to be written in intriguing prose, lacking
the technical jargon of a scientific paper; it
can be nonfiction or fiction. However, the
story must use natural history features of the
As presented
in more detail in
the side bar,
the introduction of
natural history projects
to supplant the traditional
insect collection
has increased
student motivation
throughout the semester,
and within the past 2
years, more students
are enrolling out of
interest.
insects and clearly link the animals together.
An example of such relationships could occur if, in telling the story of the little bunny
that “couldn’t,” it dies and becomes a feast
for many. Student creativity is encouraged
with their stories, and one hopes that their
fascination with the selected insects is obvious in the story.
Intermixed among these activities, as
well as others described in Table 1, are
discussions of the role of insects in different ecosystems, and the impact, both good
and bad, of insects on the human condition. Laboratory and field activities are
incorporated throughout the term to allow
examination of insect physiology, ecology,
and behavior, including a unique forensic
experience. Ultimately, I try to achieve a
balance between topics of interest to the
students and to me, with information that I
believe must be included in an introductory
entomology course, and at the same time
incorporate activities and experiences that
develop and enhance specific learning and
technical skills.
American Entomologist • Volume 52, Number 1
Evaluation and Discussion
I believe the resulting integrated course
works (at least within the environment at
Loyola College) very well to attract students
who otherwise are disinterested in insects,
and it keeps students interested and motivated throughout the semester. How can I
make this claim? Or at least, how have I
evaluated the effectiveness of the integrated
entomology course compared with a more
traditional approach?
It is important to understand that the
design of my general entomology course,
the topics selected, learning approaches
adopted, and even my attitude toward
teaching the course reflect an evolutionary
process. I did not start 11 years ago teaching
entomology this way. Not even close! And
I do not suggest that any instructor reading
my ideas adopt my syllabus or philosophy
verbatim. The ideas may serve as a template that should be modified based at the
very least on the students, the instructor’s
strengths and interests, and the educational
mission of the course and department. I have
changed all aspects of the course, with major
overhauls at times, and more recently, just
minor tinkering. The basis for most change
has come from informal assessment via
conversations (interviews) with students
before, during, and after the course (Smith
and Southerland 2002). This is a continuous process that must take place each time
I offer the course.
Nothing is earth-shaking in the method,
but it does represent a radical departure from
my predecessor at Loyola. Francis (Hank)
Giles, then an emeritus faculty member,
informed me during my job interview that
my chances of being successful teaching
entomology were slim. In his words, “students at Loyola are too damn dumb to take
entomology.” I think Hank’s words spoke
more of frustration then genuine assessment,
as his last seven attempts to offer the course
went without a single student enrolling. Did
this reflect on Hank? In part, perhaps, but
more so, it represented the changing interests
of students who major in life sciences—the
attitudes that form today’s disinterest in
survey courses.
Perhaps one vehicle for assessing the
integrated entomology course is to compare
enrollment trends with the more traditional
curriculum that Hank used. By this measure,
the current entomology course is doing well,
with average enrollments of 12 (from 11
years of enrollments) for a course capped at
18 per semester. However, in fairness to the
traditional course before me, the number
of biology majors in my department tripled
from 1981 to 1995, while the number of fulltime faculty grew by only one (me). So the
increased enrollments can also be attributed
to growth of the major, with only a modest
corresponding increase in course offerings.
Likewise, entomology course enrollments
have fluctuated widely over the last 5 years,
from a low of 5 to a peak of 24 (the cap was
raised). These variations most certainly are
independent of the pedagogy used in general
entomology.
The most substantial change I have seen
among students completing the integrated
entomology course is associated with interest and motivation during the course. As
presented in more detail in the side bar, the
introduction of natural history projects to
supplant the traditional insect collection has
increased student motivation throughout
the semester, and within the past 2 years,
more students are enrolling out of interest. I believe that reducing the size of the
insect collection has been a key motivator
leading to the changes. A second course
Natural History Projects
Most of the students that enroll in
my course have never collected or
identified any type of creature. In fact,
because most of the students are from
predominantly urban environments,
the idea of working in the field is not
only foreign, but almost repulsive (not
to mention that they are all afraid of
contracting Lyme disease). From many
informal interviews that I have had
with present and past students, the
idea of putting together a large insect
collection with the subsequent pinning
and identification is viewed with such
dismay that potential students avoid
my general entomology course. Even
when other course activities intrigue
them, the insect collection is a powerful repellent.
feature that has attracted student interest
is hissing cockroach drag racing. Although
a clear educational purpose (independent
investigation of insect locomotion) is associated with the annual event (known as
Madagascar Madness), this has become
the most memorable course experience for
the students, and it shows them first hand
that science can be fun (it could be profitable too, if ESPN would ever do live race
coverage!).
More importantly, students have begun
to take ownership of the course through at
least two activities: the student-led behavior
discussions (including lectures, demonstrations, and generation of exam questions) and
my willingness to modify course syllabus
27
based on students’ suggestions and recommendations during the term. Other exercises
and experiences can and have had a similar
effect on some students, but these two are
cited more than any others by students at
the semester’s end.
Course grades have not been a reliable
measure of the integrated entomology
course, for two reasons. First, most students
do well (the course average is usually a B on a
4.0 scale) in this course under any configuration. In fact, the only time that students have
earned a final grade below a C+ is when they
have done a poor job with the insect collection, which, in the past, carried the same
weight as a regular exam. Second, because
the course is never the same from one year to
the next, it is difficult to make comparisons.
No exams or papers from when the course
Now
is the time
to change the focus
and open discussion
on how to reach students
who have become
increasingly disinterested
in insects and
natural history.
was designed more traditionally are available
to make comparisons; and even if they did,
an additional variable (a different instructor)
must be considered. Despite these inadequacies for making comparisons, it is generally
accepted that if the course increases student
interest and motivation, then learning is
more likely to occur (McNeal and D’Avanzo
1997), which of course is a desired outcome
from integrated general entomology. Subsequently, grades will reflect the increased
learning.
Has everything tried in the course
worked? No, although in most cases,
simply tinkering with small aspects of the
approach corrected the problems. One
example with which tinkering did not help
was an activity known as electronic field
guides. Instead of developing traditional
insect collections, students were to make
digital collections, convert the images to
JPEG files, and then use the images to create a Web-based field guide. The targeted
audience was elementary and middle school
students and teachers. When discussing
the projects with teachers in the Baltimore
area, most expressed no interest in using
the field guides, and all indicated that they
lacked class time to devote to any aspect of
28
the project (my students were to work with
the teachers and students in using the field
guides). During the two years the electronic
field guides were attempted, the students
in the course generally lost interest once it
became apparent that local schools would
not be involved. Despite these problems, I
am still intrigued by the concept.
So does this type of curriculum work
for an introductory or general entomology
course? Yes, if the instructor is committed
to making connections with students and
remains flexible in approaches and pedagogy
used in the classroom. This course design is
merely a template for others and a means
to initiate dialogue about teaching with and
about insects.
As mentioned earlier, a revolution has
occurred in the way science is being taught
at the undergraduate level, but not all disciplines have participated equally. The field
of entomology and members of ESA have
always been leaders in science education,
but K–12 or graduate education is usually
targeted. The undergraduate courses, ones I
argue are the foundation of the entire discipline, never seem to receive much attention.
Now is the time to change the focus and
open discussion on how to reach students
who have become increasingly disinterested
in insects and natural history.
My response has been to adapt the collections to highlight the original intent: a
project that emphasizes natural history.
Insect collections in my class have become
greatly truncated in comparison with any
other course; and they are used to develop a
natural history story, fiction or nonfiction, by
tapping into the nontechnical writing skills
that most of my students already have. In
those projects, students individually collect
and identify 20 insect specimens, then select
10 of these collected specimens for telling a
natural history story. The story to be told is
entirely up to the students, but I encourage
the class to approach the project like Stoke’s
Observation Guides (e.g., Stokes Guide to
Observing Insects 1984) or along the lines
of Gilbert Waldbauer’s Insects through the
Seasons (1996).
The goal is for the students to use engaging prose, lacking the technical jargon of a
scientific paper, to show the links among
the selected critters by describing how they
interact, commonalties in life history strategies, or other natural history features of the
insects that clearly link the animals together.
In all cases thus far, students have elected
to develop humorous, fictional stories (but
with real biology and natural histories) in the
same vein as Gary Larson’s There’s a Hair in
My Dirt!: A Worm’s Story. (1998).
Student interest and motivation has
definitely gone up with this approach, and
the quality of their work in terms of writing
reflects this increased motivation.
References Cited
Conference Report. 2001. International workshop: modern approaches to teaching and
learning physiology. Adv. Physiol. Ed. 25(1):
64–71.
Larson, G. 1998. There’s a hair in my dirt!: A
worm’s story. Harper Collins, New York.
Leonard, W. H. 1983. An experimental study
of a BSCS-style laboratory approach for
university general biology. J. Res. Sci. Teach.
20: 807-813.
McNeal, A. P., and C. D’Avanzo. 1997. Studentactive science: models of innovation in college
science teaching. Saunders College Publishing,
Fort Worth, TX.
National Research Council. 1996. From analysis
to action: undergraduate education in science,
mathematics, engineering, and technology.
Report of a Convocation. Center for Science,
Mathematics, and Engineering Education. National Research Council, Washington, DC.
National Research Council. 2000. Inquiry and the
National Education Science Standards: A guide
for teaching and learning. National Academy
Press, Washington, DC.
National Science Foundation. 1996. Shaping the
future: new expectations for undergraduate
education in Science, Mathematics, Engineering, and Technology. NSF-96-139. http://www.
her.nsf.gov.her/due/documents/review.
National Science Foundation. 1998. Findings
from the focus groups conducted during the
review of undergraduate SME & T education. In: Shaping the future II: Perspectives
on undergraduate education in Science,
mathematics, Engineering and Technology.
NSF-98-128. http://www.her.nsf.gov.her/due/
documents/review.
Rothman, F. G., and J. L. Narum. 1999. Then,
now & in the next decade: A commentary on
strengthening undergraduate Science, Mathematics, Engineering and Technology Education.
Project Kaleidoscope, Washington, DC.
Smith, M. U., and S. A. Southerland. 2002.
Classroom assessment techniques: interviews.
http://www.flaguide.org/cat/interviews.
Stokes, D., and L. Stokes. 1984. Stokes guide to
observing insects. Little, Brown, Boston.
Waldbauer, G. 1996. Insects through the seasons.
Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
Wilcove, D., and T. Eisner. 2000. The extinction
of natural history. Chronicle Higher Ed. Sep
14: 1324.
David Rivers is the chair of the Biology
Department and has taught General Entomology at Loyola College for the past
12 years. He has also mentored over 75
undergraduate students in research aimed at
deciphering the mode of action of parasitic
wasp venoms.

American Entomologist • Spring 2006