Pete   I have the utmost respect for Joe Graham.  My comment was that the new ABJ  editor has a science background.  I made this comment because some on Bee-L questioned her ability to assess the science in articles.  
 
I meant no disrespect to Joe.  We all come with different experiences, and he was very well experienced and grounded. He took a different path, but he was knowledgeable, had a good group of writers, and provided a specific service to ABJ's readers.
 
I see in other journals a drift away from a scientist as an editor model towards editors with no science or practical background in the very subject area that they are supposedly addressing.  Journalists with no knowledge of the subject area pose problems - which I've experienced that first hand with some of the online journals.  
 
Joe set the standard for ABJ.  I'm hopeful that the new editor does the same and takes  it up a notch.  
 
I see real pressures to dumb things down in print media, as well as in the beekeeper world. For example, for the past two years I've been involved on panels and in discussions about beekeeper education.  Two viewpoints keep coming up - "let's standardize the courses" and "let's make them simpler'.  
 
I have no problems with setting standards for courses.  I'm an advocate for experienced instructors, ADA compliance, routine course assessments, etc.  I am not an advocate of standardizing all courses so that they all teach the exact same thing.  That usually leads to lowering standards to the lowest common denominator.  A concurrent push to make courses simpler, easier, 'more fun' adds to my concern.  
 
In the case of our own courses, the Montana State Beekeeping Association came to us and specifically asked for courses that would raise the bar (standards).  Those students who take, pass, and continue to advance through our courses have two comments -  these are not easy courses, and most say that they were looking for something more challenging than the typical beekeeping course or Master beekeeping  program.   
 
We just completed our 4th group at the highest level course, where every graduate does a research project.  Once again, they accomplished far more than we ever expected.   They are proud of what they've done.  They've formed a community (much like Bee-L), and they want more.  
 
When we designed our courses, we looked at every other one that we could find.  We made sure to cover the basics, but we added lots of things that do not appear in any other Master Program.  In addition, we update content annually.  It's our goal to establish high standards and rather than simply maintaining those standards, we work to improve the courses.  Fortunately, we also see continual improvement among the students.  Interest is not slacking off, and overall performance keeps climbing.
 
My purpose here is not to brag on our courses, although I will brag on our students and what they accomplish.  
 
My purpose is to say: Bee-L retains it's mission of Informed Discussions.  It has a select membership, and those members and the moderator hold discussions to a higher standard than many of the unguided and unmonitored discussions that occur on other lists.  Bee-L members are a select group of like-minded individuals who seek to learn and share science- and practical experience-based knowledge.  Bee-L is a smaller group than Bee Source - but that's a choice made by Bee-L members.
 
Similarly, our courses server a select group who want more than others provide.
 
ABJ has set standards for beekeeping trade magazines.  I hope that it continues to hold to those standards and even improve upon them.  There's an audience out there for quality, timely, and accurate information.
 
Jerry

             ***********************************************
The BEE-L mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software.  For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html