Educating aspiring geologists in field camps is problematic and needs to be fundamentally changed, according to some critics of the practice, prompting one famed geologist to cry foul.<\/p>\n
The argument is that field camps are a racist, ableist, sexist role-playing exercise driven by toxic masculinity and centered around reliving Manifest Destiny, \u201csubjugating the native populations,\u201d and the \u201cconquest of the west by the white man,\u201d said Sadredin \u201cDean\u201d Moosavi, a geologist at the Rochester Community and Technical College in Minnesota.<\/p>\n
Moosavi, widely regarded as a skilled naturalist and accomplished scientist, said there is an \u201cideological attack on field camp itself\u201d in an exclusive interview with The College Fix.<\/em><\/p>\n For budding geologists, the traditional field camp experience often marks their transition from being a college student to a beginning geology practitioner.<\/p>\n Critics argue, however, field camps are \u201cdominated by toxic masculinity because all the young, white males in the program, they all want to grow up to be Indiana Jones,\u201d Moosavi said, adding Jones wasn\u2019t even a geologist.<\/p>\n But the criticism is the men are \u201cshowing off their testosterone and their manliness and this is toxic to the women in the group and to the people who aren\u2019t \u2026 as physically fit,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n The reality though is field camps generally have been held in the west because certain geological features are easy to see there in the summer. It has nothing to do with Manifest Destiny, noted Moosavi.<\/p>\n The students who go tend to be incredibly excited to be there, he added.<\/p>\n \u201cThey\u2019re young,\u201d said Moosavi. \u201cMany of them are physically fit. Why wouldn\u2019t they climb up on the [tallest] rock so they can get a better view?\u201d<\/p>\n But, according to Moosavi, critics will argue \u201cthe fat kid feels bad because they can\u2019t climb up on the rock, so therefore the fit kid shouldn\u2019t be allowed to climb up on the rock either so the fat kid doesn\u2019t feel bad about themself.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cThey\u2019re basically changing the field camp experience to make the underrepresented demographics feel comfortable,\u201d he stated.<\/p>\n Critics, he said, are now arguing: \u201cWhat about the person who can\u2019t afford to go to field camp because they don\u2019t have the money? Or what if they can\u2019t afford to be gone that long because they have children at home that they need to take care of? Or they have to work a job during the summer? Or what if they\u2019re a woman who\u2019s afraid to be in a field camp with a lot of strange male students and faculty?…What about an ethnic minority, say someone from inner-city Newark, who now is going to be sent to some rural place in Montana and they might be the only person of their ethnicity not only in the field camp but within the whole area?\u201d<\/p>\n Some of these ideas from DEI proponents, Moosavi said, are probably doing more to hinder diversity and inclusion than further it, given that they are discouraging young people from underrepresented groups from going to field camp on the grounds that there will be so few people like them there that they will feel uncomfortable.<\/p>\n Moosavi described it as a self-fulfilling prophecy.<\/p>\n He also added, if you change the field camp experience to accommodate all these groups, \u201cit\u2019s no longer field camp. It\u2019s becoming just an exercise in \u2026 social engineering that increasingly…is not fulfilling the goals for which field camp was created.\u201d<\/p>\n This, Moosavi said, ultimately could affect hireability as the traditional field camp is essential for those seeking careers as field geologists. Exxon Mobil will want to hire a petroleum geologist who has actually looked at drill core, for example.<\/p>\n Companies will want people who have \u201cworked for a week in the heat far from the city where they have to be uncomfortable for several days and haven\u2019t showered for a few days, had to work with a small group of people very intensely without, you know, going to pieces,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n Moosavi did field work in Alaska and Canada, where he looked at methane emissions from wetland systems. He has since dedicated much of his professional career to developing \u201cplace-based\u201d field experiences for general education students and K-12 teachers that are considerably less intense than those experienced by geology majors and graduate students.<\/p>\n The traditional field camp experience, Moosavi said, might last an entire summer.<\/p>\n Other ideas being proposed by DEI proponents that focus more on the financial aspects of field camp, however, \u201care completely valid and worth considering,\u201d Moosavi said. \u201cOkay, so for the student who needs to work, they need a source of income. Is there a way to make field camp affordable? Is there a way for them to get scholarship funds so they can not only pay for the field camp but maybe even earn enough funds to maybe cover the income that they\u2019re forgoing by going to field camp?\u201d<\/p>\n That\u2019s more a financial puzzle to solve, he added.<\/p>\n To some extent, Moosavi said, oil companies once tried to address some of these issues by investing heavily in an endeavor that provided financial support for students from underrepresented groups to get what he described as \u201camazing\u201d field experiences across multiple summers. However, although many of these students went into STEM, most did not stick with geology, making the effort a failure in the eyes of the oil companies, he said.<\/p>\n