[ 635 ]

Trans. Br. mycol, Soc. ~ (3), 6'P-657 (1974)Printed in Great Britain

MYCOLOGICAL EDUCATION:A REPORT OF THE SYMPOSIUM HELD BY THE

SOCIETY AT GLASGOW, SEPTEMBER 1972

By S. A. HUTCHINSON

The programme of the Symposium (see p. 654) was arranged to fosterthe development of discussion on the successivethemes of what is needed inmycological education, of what is going on at present, and of the actualteaching methods available or in use. This loose framework was intro­duced as a stimulus to ordered and productive debate, not as a restriction;in the event it was found to be generally convenient but inevitably, andprobably advantageously, the vigorous wide-ranging discussions whichdeveloped during each sessionoverlapped considerably. The council of theBritish Mycological Society decided that the proceedings, should berecorded, and asked the author to prepare an objective and suitably in­formative summary for publication. The report which appears here isbased on a consolidation of the taped records of the verbal proceedings ofeach session with a few clearly related comments from other overlappingdiscussions. A range of references is made to identify contributors todiscussions (see p. 656); the author chose these as appropriately repre­sentative, since it would not be possible to acknowledge every contributorwithout publishing the proceedings in full. This report is not therefore anauthoritative statement of the opinion of the Society, of the Symposium, orof any quoted participant, but the author hopes that it gives a fair indica­tion of the important problems discussed. The records from which it hasbeen compiled have been deposited in the Editor's files.

Session I. Requirements by employers of mycologists

Chairman: S. A. Hutchinson

The principal speakers at the opening session reported the expected andusual problems of getting quantitative information. The response toquestionnaires was poor; in one case, out of 43 addressees, 23 replied toan enquiry on requirements for industrial employment [42], but in othercases [46; 26] only a small proportion replied. Comments on the likelihoodofsuch small samples being unrepresentative and probably biased towardscriticism of existing situations were well illustrated by the report of a cor­respondent replying - ' I haven't got time to say what mycologists shoulddo, but they aren't doing it' [26]. The comprehensive range of interestsand experience of the participants [cf. membership list below] must com­pensate to some extent for this possible bias, although the fact that they hadallocated the time and money to attend the symposium may indicate that

636 Transactions British Mycological Society Supplement

they have an unrepresentative enthusiasm for the subject [38]. With thesequalifications the remarkable unanimity of the opinions of all the principalspeakers was probably significant. They all strongly emphasized thepreference for broadly educated scientists, who have sufficient training in avariety of subjects to appreciate their relevance to particular problems,who can frame questions which are meaningful as subjects for investigationby specialists in these subjects, and who can express themselves clearly.Comprehension of the technique of scientific inquiry, enthusiasm, intel­lectual honesty and rigorous thinking, accuracy, reliability and a sense ofresponsibility, flexibility and willingness to learn, were generally thoughtto be more important attributes than expertise in particular specializa­tions. There was a general feeling that employers are prepared, and manywould prefer, to teach specific technological skills on the job, and thatthere is therefore less demand for the highly trained but possibly lessflexible specialist. The range of emphasis included suggestions that a veryuseful graduate would be one with a broad general training but onespecialist skill [46], and that sufficient technical training to preservelaboratory safety would be looked for in a recruit for pathological work[26]. There was an interesting comment on the very small number ofmycologists employed in the actively growing mushroom industry, and onthe opinion that an employer in this particular industry might at present bemore likely to look for technical expertise than general education [46].This may be a reflexion of satisfactory results of the highly developedtechnical control and ofthe narrow limits within which this industry worksat present. General training is more likely to be rewarding where there isgreater chance of meeting completely new situations or of developingoriginal new processes [38]. The discussion of the optimal training fortechnicians suggested a need to clarify the variety of sorts ofjobs which arecovered by this overworked term. These may range from highly skilledexperimental officers, who may have both independent work and super­visory responsibility, tojunior laboratory assistants in the first stages oftheir training after leaving school. Accuracy, reliability, a sense ofrespon­sibility, flexibility and enthusiasm to learn are sensible requirements forposts throughout this range. Some work done by technicians demands inaddition ability to carry out original and independent inquiry and to makecritical judgement of experimental evidence and deductions. Theseabilities may be little if at all distinguishable from those needed for much'graduate' academic work, and graduates are now not infrequentlyemployed in technical-grade posts [59]. There seems to be a need forsome clarification in this career structure [IS] which might be examinedappropriately in the current restructuring agreements with TechnicalTrade Unions [26].

Session 2. The place ofmycology in a general university education

Chairman: J. M. Hirst

The discussions about the sorts of training suitable for entrants to par­ticular specialized employment overlapped with and led naturally intothis topic. The two leading speakers [68, 70] and the many contributors to

Mycological Education 637the discussion drew clear distinctions between the direct values to man­kind of learning about fungi, the values of mycology as an aid in teachingmankind about life, and the suitability of different sorts of ways in whicheach of these sorts of training can be done. The first two values were notedwith little discussion or difference of opinion. These included the obviousneed for biologists to comprehend the parts played by saprophytes, sym­bionts, commensals and parasitic fungi in the ecological interactions onwhich all life depends, the ways in which fungal activity has been con­trolled for man's direct advantage, and the usefulness offungi as media forteaching many general genetical, ecological and physiological principles[68]. There was, however, very vigorous discussion about alternative orcomplementary ways in which these topics could best contribute togeneral biological training.

Training centred on taxonomic groups can be useful in focusing atten­tion on first-hand study of the structure and function of particular organ­isms. The danger of making generalizations without such specific personalknowledge of structure, functioning and range of variation of individualswas generally stressed [29, 32, 67]. Teaching centred around levels ofbiological organization and interactions, ranging from biochemistry tocells, organisms, communities, etc., more commonly reflects current think­ing. The widespread importance of fungi will probably result in their beingstudied in many diverse contexts in such courses. There will, however, beless assurance of a place for mycology as a distinct topic in schools ofbiology organized on these lines than in those organized around taxonomicgroups [70]. There was marked interest in ways in which graduates fromtraining of the 'levels of biological organisation' type may themselves befitted to teach the next generation. The staff teaching current 'general'courses are mostly products from taxonomically centred training. Ageneral course designed by a group of biologists who have developed broadinterests after such training is more likely to be based on first-hand know­ledge of a good range of whole organisms than one designed by a group ofindividuals each trained as a specialist in some general study area [34, 40].This was neatly reinforced by the suggestion that scientific knowledge isthe product of individuals, not of democratic committees [19]. There wasa strong general opinion that mycology, like any other scientific matter,should not be taught unless a teacher is available who understands it[32, 70]. The shortage of specialist mycological taxonomists is alreadycausing difficulties in pathology [34]. Suggestions for ways of reconcilingthe accepted need for general training and this continued need forspecialists included:

(a) Continuation of freedom for different institutions to organize theirown choice of courses, and of the development of 'centres of excellence',with the hope that this will prouce a sufficient diversity in types of gradu­ates to meet the various needs [68, 40].

(b) Specializations to be catered for by postgraduate courses [68].(c) Ad hoc specialist training of a variety of types to be organized as

demand develops from industry, research, etc. [32, 52].The discussions led to further comments on ways in which existing

specialists in research or other institutions, industry, etc., are or might be

638 Transactions British Mycological Society Supplement

made use of in university training. The comments emphasized the value ofsuch people and contacts, but they did not add significantly to the abovesuggestions about how their successors might be produced.

Session 3. Review ofcurrent practices

Chairman: D. D. Clarke

The most consistent theme which emerged from the range of reports wasthat of the distribution of mycological teaching between ' first' and'higher' degrees. In Britain mycological teaching perse has a consistentlysubstantial place in first-degree teaching organized around ' traditional'comprehensive taxonomic cover. It is less assured of a consistent place, butit frequently has a substantial optional place in universities and otherinstitutions offering non-comprehensive optional unit courses. Postgraduatetraining is still based primarily on the traditional higher degree by re­search thesis, but there is an increasing emphasis on organized post­graduate teaching courses, either as an additional requirement for theolder post-graduate degree by research, or for higher degrees or diplomasby examination [7 r], The situation in Australia and in CommonwealthAfrican countries is broadly similar, with variations resulting from nationalfloristic and geographical factors ; for example, in Australia the amount ofattention paid to the subject is markedly influenced by the impact whichfungi make on the public in the area - it is more difficult to establishinterest in the arid areas climatically inhospitable to fungi than in the moretemperate south-east [33]. Though the terrestrial distribution of fungi isgenerally more catholic than that of the Spermatophyta there is stillurgent need for textbooks adapted to local conditions [33, 40] .

The Commonwealth situation contrasts sharply with that in France, theFederal German Republic and the United States. In all these countries thefirst-degree courses are based on a general training, with only minorreference to fungi in general taxonomic, ecological or physiological con­texts. Specific mycological courses are given in the equivalent of British'post-gradute ' training. In the Federal German Republic the traditionalfree choice of the Humboldt tradition has had to be restricted to cope withthe current numbers of students and scientific needs. Students duringtheir first three years, leading to the' Diploma' qualifying for teachers insecondary schools, attend general biological courses in which reference tofungi is mostly incidental. In later years, comparable to British post­graduate training, there are more specialized and extensive mycologicalcourses associated with the development of 'centres of excellence' indifferent universities, depending on the research interests of the relativelyindependent occupants of the 'Lehrstiihlen' [rg]. In France fungi formonly a small part of the three years of general courses usually leading to the"Licencie ' qualification. There are, however, many highly specializedmycological courses in national institutes, research laboratories and someuniversities as part of the training for the degree of'Docteur ' [6]. It ismore difficult to make comprehensive generalizations about the variety ofcourses in the United States. Commonly the first-degree courses containlittle more mycological teaching than that of the English ' A' level syllabus,

Mycological Education 639but some of them, and much of the higher-degree training, may includespecialist courses which are far beyond those of B.Sc. courses in BritishUniversities. The range and variety of these are related to the distributionof academic staff in the many' centres of excellence' in the country [32].The information available about the U.S.S.R. suggests that the time allo­cated to mycology in first-degree courses is substantially greater than thatallocated in the U.S.A.; much of the teaching has an old-fashionedmorphological/taxonomic bias, but the enthusiasm of the students andtheir ability to contribute to discussion is of a very high standard [32].

The discussion which followed this session centred more around the sortof teaching carried out than around the relative allocation of time. Therewas emphasis on the distinction between concern for teaching informationand concern for the development of personal habits of inquiry and learn­ing by students. Several speakers suggested that undergraduates are com­monly grossly 'over-lectured' [40, Ig], that such students rarely haveenough time to develop or to follow up personal interests [12], that theydo not have time to use libraries adequately and that they are hesitant orunpractised in moving around and in developing original work in labora­tories [6g], There was, however, also much concern for the many studentswho have not yet learnt to cope with the productive organization of' freetime'; suggested ways of overcoming this centred mostly around themes of,motivation' ; for example, changes in school teaching, particularly wideruse of 'Nuffield' type teaching, may increase the entry of students withwell-motivated, enquiring minds [40]. Many more traditionally trainedstudents will probably still need much carefully planned stimulus andguidance to develop such habits. To do this university teachers need to bemore than brilliant scientists; they themselves need to be motivated toteaching, and to understand and be able to use up-to-date techniques forstimulating mass awareness, etc. [6]. It may be fostered by well-organizedtutorials and essay writing [Ig]. An interesting comparison was drawnbetween the relative ease with which 'self-motivated' teaching can beintroduced under totalitarian regimes where university selection isrigorous and failures are directed to low-grade employment, and thedifficulties under regimes when university entry is relatively easy andthere is low competitive pressure to make good progress [Ig]. An increasein time freed for the planned purpose of developing appropriate personallearning needs to be paralleled by development of methods of measuringthe degree to which the students use the time for the purpose, and the valueof the effort which they make in relation to the overall objectives of thetraining. Unless this is done reduction in formal meetings may resultmerely in students devoting the freed time to other courses which haveheavier measured requirements [37].

The value of technologically orientated training in stimulating motiva­tion was discussed in an earlier session. It is often difficult to convincestudents that technological training is usually not the most profitableobjective of a university course, and that it is generally not put at highpriority by employers of biologists [40]. The same problem is not un­known in dealing with university staff [38]. Emphasis on technologicalrelevance may be a useful way of stimulating motivation in courses which

640 Transactions British Mycological Society Supplementhave a wider real objective. Irrespective of the correctness of judgement, astudent doing something which he thinks he needs is likely to be bettermotivated than one doing something he thinks he does not need [3]. Over­emphasis on such a factor in course design may, however, reflect a weak­ness in staff abilities; it may be an easy way of avoiding the proper butdifferent duty of describing, and of developing students' interests in, thereal functions of the training which they are offered [38].

Session 4. Developments in teaching andexamination methods

Chairman: G. H. Banbury

R. L. Codnor started the session by describing a case-history of theproduction of some teaching films in his university. He emphasized thevast effort and time involved in planning, production and subsequent test­ing and editing, and the slow rate at which material was completed. Thisseems to apply generally. The experience was intrinsically useful in pro­voking critical thinking about the teaching required, but the time, moneyand effort involved in producing a small amount of material was daunting.His experience suggested that such aids might usefully supplement per­sonal contact between teacher and student, but that they are unlikely toreplace it. G. Hadley then reviewed a range of audio-visual aids which arenow available, ranging from blackbo ard and chalk to modern projectiontelevision apparatus. He suggested that some of these may be particularlyuseful to mycologists in demonstrating microscopic material to largegroups, in demonstration of successive stages of a continuous process, andin recording evanescent material for future reference. The limitations ofuse seem to be more in teachers' knowledge of teaching technology than inthe range and potentialities of the tools available.

From the resulting discussion it seems that this session would have beenstrengthened by a further paper reviewing the functions of teaching aids.This might have reduced possible confusion between the teaching of badlessons, which may be done by any techniques, and the efficient use of allavailable techniques to teach good lessons. The value of a lesson using ateaching aid is obviously limited primarily by the value of the topic whichit sets out to teach. Examples of the use of an aid to teach an undesirabletopic, or of the inefficient or unsuitable use ofan aid to teach a desirable one,are not logical bases for criticizing the intrinsic values of such aids [38]. Away in which an aid might draw attention to incompetent ancillary teach­ing was illustrated [32]; attention was drawn to the great power of some ofthe modern techniques in making impact on students' minds, and thedanger of this being permitted or encouraged to reduce their properscepticism of unsupported scientific claims [37]. The programme mightwell have been improved by including specific examinations of techniquesof presenting stimulus/response situations [4], although this topic appearedin a minor way during some discussions. The awareness of the difficulty ofprejudging student's response to new teaching methods, and the increasedemphasis which many teachers now put on feed-back information fromstudents, were commended [61A]. There was widespread and strong sup­port for the establishment of some arrangement to compile and publicise

Mycological Education 641

lists and locations of films which are available [40] ; the meeting noted thatthe Society is co-operating in this with the Organising Committee of theFirst International Mycological Congress. The need to agree on an overtexpression of what you are trying to do in training, before trying tomeasure how well you are doing it, was also a main theme in the paper onexaminations presented by M. Roebuck. These objectives need to specifyat least the minimum that a satisfactory student should be able to do at theend of the training, and they are of greatest value if they are expressed inmeasurable terms. He drew attention to the degree to which much currentassessment is subjective, and based on ranking students against a norm on ascale of performance in an imperfectly analysed test, rather than objectiveand based on testing personal performance against thoughtfully designedcriteria of required abilities. Different kinds of tests are likely to be neededto measure different kinds of abilities; e.g. tests of ability to recall in~

formation are likely to be quite different from tests of higher level skillssuch as the ability to judge the best reaction in a given situation controlledby known variables, or the ability to design a scientific investiga­tion.

In the discussion of this paper it was suggested that definition of object­ives may stifle students' freedom and imagination [48]. It seems likely,however, that if a student is stultified by training it is because what isdemanded of the student by the training is itself stultifying. The solution isto choose objectives which do not have this effect; e.g. if an imaginativeapproach to problem-solving is required then the training should lead tothis, and the assessment should set out to measure explicitly the degree towhich it has been achieved. An obvious and avoidable pitfall in allexaminations is setting tests to measure what can be measured most con­sistently and easily, rather than that which is most important in thetraining [37]. The value of a 'structured' examination which is designedto measure specific skills or abilities which contribute to the total 'satis­factory performance', would be lost unless a candidate is required toanswer all the questions [52].

Session 5. Mycology in schoolsChairman: J. M. Hirst

In presenting the first paper K. M. Jack emphasized that he spoke as anindividual, not as a representative of the Inspectorate. He pointed outthat mycology is over-specialized as a subject for a school curriculum; itdoes, however, include knowledge which is intrinsically important tochildren and microbiological material is often convenient for the illustra­tion of general biological topics. It seems likely that there is a widespreadslow growth in the use of microbiological techniques. This has beenencouraged in recent years by the practical emphasis developing in newersyllabuses and in public examinations. The major constraints in itsdevelopment are the costs of material and laboratories, inadequate tech­nical support, and lack of confidence and knowledge of teachers. Manysenior staff now responsible for biology teaching have had little directtraining in microbiological techniques. There seems to be a need for

41 MYC 62

642 Transactions British Mycological Society Supplementmore recruitment of trained microbiologists to school teaching and formore in-service courses in microbiological methods.

B. W. Bainbridge emphasised the widespread appreciation of the valueof microbiological practical work in school syllabuses, both in demonstrat­ing general biological principles in a convenient way and in illustratingdirect applications of biology to everyday life. He spoke clearly of the needfor general circulation of information about suitable experiments whichcan be carried out in school conditions.

In the discussion there was strong support for the exploration of ways inwhich communication with and support for school teachers could beimproved [40]. Attention was drawn to the development of teacherscentres in England, sponsored by the Institute of Biology [68], to theexistence of in-service courses in at least some Polytechnics [57], to thewillingness of many academic laboratories to provide reasonable amountsof pure cultures [23] and to communication already available throughextra-mural departments and a wide range of ad hoc liaison committees,etc., in Universities [41].

Session 6. Films, demonstrations andsmall group discussion

On the final afternoon the members divided into informal discussiongroups where many of the themes were examined in detail in relation tothe training of plant pathologists, of medical mycologists, and in otherspecialities; they also had opportunities to examine exhibits of teachingscripts, videotapes and other visual aids, and to tour the UniversityTelevision Centre. Professor Brian gave a closing address, which is printedin full below.

CLOSING ADDRESS

Professor P. W. Brian

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I understand that I have beenallowed an hour. Let me say at once that I don't propose to use it. Lecturetheatres are always interesting places, and scratched on the back of thebench in front of where I have been sitting has been a most human docu­ment, I suspect by an insufficiently motivated student. He wrote 'Heredied John Smith while listening to Professor X' - I won't say who X wasbecause he was a former colleague of mine - 'Requiescat in pace. He diedof old age waiting for Professor X to say something new.' Well, if there aremany of you as sensitive as the late John Smith there will be a wholesaletragedy here because nothing that I have to say is new at all. I shall only beretelling once again things that have already been mentioned once andsometimes more. My main purpose is to recall the kind of things that wehave discussed; the educationalists tell us that to get something across tostudents you should say it more than once, and that they are most per­ceptive just before they go to sleep! I agree with almost all the points thathave been made. A characteristic of our discussions has been the lack ofmuch controversy, so that I hope a personal view will approximate to afairly general consensus of the views that have been expressed. I propose topick on six or seven questions that have been raised and to say a little about

Mycological Education 643them. And I think the first and most important is - Why teach mycology?I am speaking here this evening as a member of a department of botany ofa traditional kind, but one I'm glad to say in which mycology and plantpathology have been an integral part of the courses since 1895. But myattitude is, I hope, not that of the' dyed in the wool', old-fashioned depart­mental botanist, but that of a biologist. I do firmly believe in biology as aunity, I think that division into departments of this, that and the otheris largely a matter of convenience, or inconvenience, but that the sciencethat we are trying to teach is that of biology. I believe that biology isessential in the education of anybody going in for higher education, forpeople who want to understand the world, how it works and how todeal with its problems. Training for jobs is secondary but important. Thisdoesn't mean that I ignore relevance - to use the cant phrase - rather thecontrary.

Now, in the biology teaching that I believe in, I would certainly give areasonable major place to mycology. In thinking of what we call the plantkingdom, it stands out that there are two groups of outstanding importancein the numbers of species, which is some measure of biological success, inthe variety of their adaptation to environmental change, in their metabolicdiversity, and in their economic importance to man. These groups are theseed plants and the fungi.

Of terrestrial organisms the seed plants above all have brought the art ofphotosynthesis to its highest level and they are really responsible, in ter­restrial terms at least , for virtually all the conversion of inorganic carbonto organic carbon upon which our life largely depends. They are thesource of virtually all our crop plants and of our food, of many medicinals.

Similarly, you can make a very impressive case for the importance offungi . Fungi have a unique structure, unique relationships with the en­vironment, and in many respects unique metabolic processes. And thisvery uniqueness makes it important that they should be taught in the con­text of general courses in biology or botany or microbiology. As DrWebster pointed out yesterday, they are strikingly different from theseed plants, and therefore form a useful sort of group to compare withthem in their basic heterotrophic metabolism from which they derive theirimportance as saprophytes, as plant and animal parasites, and as sym­bionts of the autotrophic plants. They are also well-behaved inhabitants oflaboratories, with convenient habits, and can be used not only for mycologybut for many other aspects of science, and we have been given examples oftheir elegance in the teaching of genetics, morphogenesis, and aspects ofphysiology and metabolism. And finally, they are of overwhelming eco­nomic importance, in a negative sense, in biodeterioration, plant diseaseand animal disease, in a positive sense as minor sources of food and assources of such important chemicals as alcohol, citric acid, antibiotics,drugs and of enzymes for use in various industrial processes. Finallyincreased yield in crops depends on the establishment of proper relation­ships with symbiotic fungi in various sorts of ways, in particular with theendophytic mycorrhizae.

And so any kind of biology that does not take account of the fungi ishorribly lopsided and intellectually deficient, and incapable of understand-

4 1-2

644 Transactions British Mycological Society Supplementing the world. And therefore in any biological course it is essential to learnsomething about this unique, interesting and important group of organ­isms. I said that my main motivation in teaching biology is that it is animportant intellectual discipline in a very general sense. But of course I amnot blind to the obvious need for applied mycological teaching as well,because of the very great economic importance of the fungi, and one cansee the desperate need for the very best possible teaching in plant pathologyThere is an increasing need for plant pathologists in all countries in theworld, as well as for people in industry knowledgeable about the fungi. Ibelieve that the applied course must be pretty carefully balanced, and nottoo vocational, because there is the danger in teaching the technology oftoday as if this was the end of all things. You are in fact tending to teachpeople to deal with problems, with a technology which is already in astate of obsolescence as it were and the real thing is that they have to copewith the problems of 25 years hence. And people who were taught thebest methods of pest control 25 years ago learned what is so muchnonsense now; so even in teaching applied courses you must try to inducein people the enquiring flexibility of mind which enables them to keep upwith the development of things. There has been fairly general agreementthat there should be a change in emphasis in the teaching of mycologyaway from traditional methods, and that taxonomic and evolutionaryapproaches should be played down a little, and that we should move moretowards teaching mycology in terms of the biology of fungi, their inter­relations with other organisms and the environment, their physiologygenetics and so forth, in addition to morphology and taxonomy.

It is also important that any teaching of mycology should be as a con­stituent of a broader biological course. If any university were to develop acourse whereby you could take a B.Sc. in mycology I hope that theywould get no students, because I believe it is essential in first-degree bio­logical teaching to have sufficient depth so that people can understand theinteractions, as it were, of all living things. Professor Last detailed thekinds of science that a plant pathologist might be expected to know some­thing about, so I think you will agree that the last thing you want is tonarrow any education. Above all, students must be made to realize thatwhat they are studying are natural objects, not just things that they find onready prepared slides, or growing on ready-prepared petri-dish plates,and they should be led to realize that these things are real by introducingthem to the collecting, isolation and general handling of their ownspecimens.

I see the practical class not only as a way to enable students to feel thatthese organisms are real living things with their own personalities but alsoto develop the proper kind of rapport between the teacher and the student ­which is really at the centre of many of the difficulties in education today.I think that all these modern developments of teaching - of the pro­grammed-learning type of thing, these little cubicles and so forth whereyou put a pair of headphones on and do what you are told - are remark­ably useful things as part of an educational process, but the idea of shovingsomebody into one of these cubicles to do all their learning in that way ispositively horrifying. There you lose all real contact between teacher and

Mycological Education 645student, and if you get student revolutions it is no more than you deserve.

And this brings me to the starting-point, the question of motivationamongst students, and dedication or mission or vocation in teachers. It isinteresting to note that these attributes have all got, as it were, religiousundertones. As regards motivation, I think that it is a good first principle tohave in mind that when you feel dissatisfied with the motivation of a groupof students in front of you that you should think - whose fault is it? I suspectthat virtually always it is not their own individual faults, but the faults ofthe society they have been brought up in, and possibly of the society inwhich they are working at that time. And really, I think, the giving ofstudents the right kind of motivation is part of the job that we have to do.And one of the things I think that one has to do these days, because students'views do change, is to demonstrate the relevance of all that you are teach­ing. One can get fed up to the back teeth with the use of this word, un­grammatically as it is usually used, but students today really are exercisedin their minds about the social importance of this, that and the other. Whyshould we be taught this if it is completely useless and irrelevant to life?The fact is of course that most of what they are taught is indeed relevant,but one can't expect them to realize this by some sort of process of self­revelation; we must be able to point it out to them, and I think we alwayscan do this. But we should be much more careful now and in the future inmaking this a part of any course, and when teaching them mycology,give them some inkling of why this has relationship to everyday life foreveryone. This is quite easy to do and makes a very considerable dif­ference in the motivation of students. And if we can get this across to ourstudents the message will go a great deal farther. There will be a wideraudience as well. And, who knows, eventually one result might be that themushroom industry might think it worth while to employ two mycologistsinstead of one.

I am now really going on from 'why teach mycology' to the secondquestion of how we teach it, and there are still one or two points we mighttake up. The question of the use of teaching aids I have mentioned already,perhaps not too seriously. I think it is painfully obvious that we can get animmense amount of value out of modern teaching aids. Some of us arefrightened of these things I know, because I am myself - it took me a longtime to dare to use an overhead projector in a lecture, but now I wouldn'tbe without one, and I think all of us must get used to these things as theycan be immensely valuable. They'll never do the teaching of the mycologyfor us but they will help us to do the job.

I would just like to pass briefly to another question; who is going toteach us to teach? I think it is quite indefensible that it is regarded asabsolutely essential that schoolteachers should receive a most carefultraining in how to teach, whereas the university teacher is supposed toget by with no training at all. It is absolute nonsense of course and we mustdo something about it. And how many of us in fact analyse our aims andour methods of teaching in relation to these aims, as was suggested in histalk by Mr Roebuck? I think rather few of us, and this is clearly inde­fensible. And of course one can make similar remarks about the way we setabout examining. However, I must say it is very obvious in any meeting of

646 Transactions British Mycological Society Supplementuniversity teachers these days that they are much more conscious of theneed to be critical about teaching than they have been in the past, and thisincreased consciousness is, I think, a very good thing.

Now, a few words about one or two other topics. We have heard a little,far too little I think, about the problems of teaching mycology in uni­versities in other countries, and we are very grateful to the people who havecome and talked to us about them. It is clear that problems are in detaildifferent in those different circumstances. But it is also obvious that themajor problems are the same, and that we could learn a good deal fromone another's experiences, and I wish that more of this kind of inter­change of ideas were possible.

I feel one ought to say something about medical mycology. It clearly isfearfully important but obviously a highly specialized field which probablycannot be more than touched upon in ordinary courses, and should be alater specialization. I don't think it does any harm, however, in anyelementary mycology teaching to make it clear that this branch of thescience does exist and that it is extremely important. I used to thinkthat medical mycology was a bogus sort of subject because it wasn'tmycology at all. This certainly cannot be said today, and somehow orother I am sure we must find some way of integrating their interests withthe more traditional interests in a better way than we do.

We discussed the question of techniques. It has always been my ex­perience in any mycological or microbiological research that the contribu­tion of the technician is of inestimable value, and the majority of mypublished papers in fact have been in collaboration with a technician. Wedepend on their expert knowledge to an extent that I think we frequentlydo not really realize. Although I think this question of the education of atechnician is perhaps a secondary item in our discussions here for these twodays, nevertheless I think it is an important one and we should neverforget it.

I was very impressed to hear this morning two discussions of mycologyteaching in schools. We university teachers have a rather divided attitudeto school biology teaching. I have frequently heard colleagues in momentsof desperation say, I wish they wouldn't teach biology in school at all,then we shouldn't have so much bad work to undo and so forth and soforth. Of course it is particularly galling these days when the young ladsand girls come up from school knowing far more about molecular biologythan any of us do; and therefore finding us rather old fogies who do notreally know what the growing points of biology are. Though one has thesemoments of irritation and desperation, of course it doesn't really representone's balance. If teaching biology is important at the higher educationallevel to give people a proper outlook on the world, how much moreimportant is it that it should be done at school. And I welcome the way inwhich school curricula have been immeasurably improved - improvedmore rapidly I think than some university curricula, and I think contactbetween university and schooi teaching can be a very good thing. In rela­tion to this question of mycology teaching in school, I would agree thatyou cannot hope to get much mycology as such taught in school, but theusefulness offungi as experimental materials certainly should be exploited.

Mycological Education 647and I hope that this Society will do anything that is possible to ensure thatthere is a necessary interplay of information, because doing this kind ofthing under school conditions is difficult, and where somebody finds aparticularly good kind of experiment which they can do with rather littlesophisticated apparatus, it can be of immense benefit to a schoolteacher,and we want to make sure that they hear about it.

The President rather tempted me to make some remarks about physio­logical plant pathology. I will resist the temptation, except to say this:that I do not think that physiological plant pathology should receivemore than its due attention in a university, but that it should receive some.In my own department what they get in fact is a course on physiologicaland certain special aspects; and I think this is about right, because you can­not begin to understand what this physiological business is all about, un­less you know all the bread and butter side of plant pathology first. And soit should, I think, be a minor part of a course in plant pathology, but I amquite sure that it should be a part. You have only to look at the journalsthese days, and to see how more and more of the research is moving intothis field, and I suspect that in twenty years time when our present-daystudents are really doing their best work, this will be the fastest-growingand a most valuable part of plant pathology. So we must be prepared for it.

And, finally, I come to the point with which we started, this question ofjobs. You will have gathered what I think the source of my philosophy andwhy I teach biology, and why I think that mycology is an important con­stituent of biology. You will see that because the number of jobs is decreas­ing at the moment, it won't tempt me to suggest that we should stopteaching mycology the year after next, or anything like that. Because Ireally think that we are thinking about education primarily, and second­arily about jobs. In the present situation one should obviously think care­fully before putting on too many very highly vocational courses, but thereagain, if these are done properly, as well as a vocation one can have a propereducation. I think that the increased awareness of the significance of fungiin the biological context will eventually lead to awareness of the possi­bility of new applications of this knowledge of fungi, and more jobs.

Finally, I have already mentioned the increased interest in teaching atuniversity and comparable levels, interest in its content, in the methods ofteaching and so forth. This, as I have said, is something which we can bepleased with; the very success of this meeting is the strongest evidence thatthis new feeling is as evident amongst mycology teachers as amongsteveryone else. I've enjoyed this meeting immensely; such exchange ofideas is most stimulating. It will certainly help me. I have to go back theweek after next to give the first lectures in a new course in fungal biology,and I hope that the Council of the Society will bear in mind that it mightbe a good thing to have meetings of this kind, not necessarily every year,but certainly from time to time. I am sure everyone here, like me, has gotan immense stimulus out of this meeting. Thank you very much.

648 Transactions British Mycological Society Supplement

PROGRAMME

Tuesday, 19 September

SESSION I Chairman: S. A. HUTCHINSON

The Requirements of People who Employ Mycologists

Professor F. T. Last (University of Edinburgh): 'Plant Pathology'Dr E. G. Jefferys (I.C.I. Pharmaceuticals Division): 'Mycologists III

Industry'Dr J. C. Gentles (University of Glasgow): 'Medical mycology'Dr M. Noble (Department of Agriculture (Scotland) (Retired)): 'Tech­

nicians'

SESSION 2 Chairman: J. M. HIRST

Discussion of the Place ofMycology in a General University Education (led byProfessorJ. Webster (Exeter) and Professor M. H. Williamson (York)).

SESSION 3 Chairman: D. D. CLARKE

Reviews of Current Syllabuses and Timetables Used in British and ForeignHigher Education

Dr I. M. Wilson (University of Wales (Retired)): 'Great Britain'Professor P. Boullard (University of Rouen): 'France'Professor R. Esser (Ruhr University): 'Federal German Republic'Professor C. T. Ingold (University of London): 'Africa 'Professor L. E. Hawker (University of Bristol): 'Observations during

visits to U.S.A. and U.S.S.R.'Mr R. N. Hilton (University of Western Australia): 'Australia'

Wednesday, 20 September

SESSION 4 Chairman: G. H. BANBURY

Developments in Teaching Methods

Mr R. C. Codner (University of Bath): 'A mycologist's encounter withteaching technology'

Dr G. Hadley (University of Aberdeen): 'The use of audio-visual aids inmycology teaching'

Mr M. Roebuck (University of Glasgow): 'Examinations'

SESSION 5 Chairman: J. M. HIRST

Mycology in Schools

Mr M.Jack (H.M. Inspectorate): 'The place of mycology in moderncurricula'

Dr B. W. Bainbridge (University of London): 'The study of fungi inschool biology'

Mycological Education

SESSION 6

Discussion groups on ways ofteaching particular topics

Demonstrations and exhibits of teaching exercises, of the use of new tech­niques, of methods for examination and assessment, etc. The extensiveclosed-circuit television system of the University was in operation andarrangements were made for the showing of films, TV-taped programmes,etc., as required.

Reports by leaders ofdiscussion groups

Closing address

Professor P. W. Brian (University of Cambridge)

650 Transactions British Mycological Society Supplement

LIST OF PARTICIPANTS

[I] Abou Heilah, A.[2] Alcorn, J. W. S.[3] Ayerst, G.[4] Bainbridge, B. W.[5] Banbury, G. H.[6] Boullard, P.[7] Brian, P. W.[8] Butler, G.[9] Callaghan, A. A.

[10] Caulton, D. A.[I I] Channon, A. G.[12] Clarke, D. D.[13] Codner, R. C.[14] Coffey, M. D.[15] Coles, A. L. J.[16] Coley-Smith, J. R.[17] Curran, Mrs P.[18] Dennis, C.[19] Esser, K.[20] Evans, E. H.[2I] Firman, I. D.[22] Flannigan, B.[23] Fletcher, H. J.[24] Fletcher, J.[25] Fuller, H. T.[26] Gentles, J.[27] Gibbs, Miss J.[28] Greenhalgh, G. N.[29] Hadley, G.[30] Harrold, C. E.[31] Harrower, K. M.[32] Hawker, L. E.[33] Hilton, R. N.[34] Hirst, J. M.[35] Holmes, S. J.[36] Hudson, H. J.[37] Hutchinson, S. A.[38] Hutchinson, S. A.[39] lng, B.[40] Ingold, C. T.[41] Jack, K. M.[42] Jefferys, E. G.[43] Jeves, T. M.[44] Laborda, F.[45] Laborda, Mrs F.r46] Last, F. T.

Glasgow UniversityWest of Scotland Agricultural CollegeWolverhampton PolytechnicLondon UniversityDurham UniversityRouen University, FranceCambridge UniversityBirmingham UniversityI, Pear Tree Drive, Madely, Cheshire36, Hope Terrace, EdinburghWest of Scotland Agricultural CollegeGlasgow UniversityBath UniversityDublin UniversityHull UniversityHull UniversityGalway UniversityFood Research Institute, NorwichRuhr University, West GermanyBangor UniversityBath UniversityHeriot-Watt UniversityAberdeen Technical CollegeNewcastle UniversityUniversity College, DublinGlasgow UniversityIO, Mayfield Way, Firndown, DorsetLiverpool UniversityAberdeen UniversityBirmingham UniversityExeter UniversityBristol UniversityUniversity of Western AustraliaRothamsted Experimental StationWest of Scotland Agricultural CollegeCambridge UniversityGlasgow UniversityEditorial commentChester CollegeLondon UniversityH.M. InspectorateI.e.I. Alderley ParkHull UniversityLong Ashton Research StationLong Ashton Research StationEdinburgh University

Mycological Education 651[47] Lehmann, P. F. Cambridge University[48] Lewis, B. G. Norwich University[49] Lockhart, C. Leeds University[50] Logan, C. Plant Pathology Field Station, Belfast[51] Macdonald, Miss C. Leeds University[52] Madelin, M. F. Bristol University[53] Mantle, P. G. Imperial College, London[54] Milne, L. J. R. Western General Hospital, Edinburgh[55] Milton, J. M. Swansea University[56] Moore, F.]. Plant Pathology Labs., Harpenden[57] Morrison, R. Sunderland Polytechnic[58] Nicolson, T. H. Dundee University[59] Noble, M. Dept. of Agriculture, Scotland (Retired)[60] Oliver, D. L. Cape Town University[61] Owen, H. Reading University[61 A] Roebuck, M. Glasgow University[62] Rose, A. C. 11, High Beach, Felixtowe, Suffolk[63] Snow, D. Reading University[64] Stuart, M. Dublin University College[65] Tamimi, K. M. Glasgow University[66] Tann, K. K. Manchester University[67] Watson, R. D. North of Scotland Agricultural College[68] Webster, J. Exeter University[69] Wheeler, B. E. J. London University[)o] Williamson, M. York University[71] Wilson, I. M. University of Wales (Retired)[72] Yelland, A. S. North East London Polytechnic