Difference between revisions of "Keck Foundation Proposal"

From Earlham CS Department
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m
 
(13 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
−
This document is a set of ideas and talking points under consideration as the basis of a proposal to the W.M. Keck Foundation.  The plan is to refine this and then give it to Doug so that he can have a preliminary conversation with Keck's program director (is it still Maria Pellegrini?)
+
September 21, 2005
  
−
Our current thinking is to build a tightly integrated set of projects which both span the natural science disciplines and are held together by a strong common thread.
+
This document is a set of ideas and talking points, one developed by Science Division/Science Friday group and one developed by Ray Hively, concerning what types of support Earlham might approach the W.M. Keck Foundation for.
  
−
* Important attributes of our proposal:
+
Broadly speaking there are two areas of approach, which may or may not be mutually exclusive:
−
** Student/faculty research and curriculum development.  The problem areas we select will fully integrate student/faculty research with our existing curriculum through the development of learning modules.  This allows us to "re-use" both our human and equipment investments and further strengthen the ties between scientific discovery and teaching.
 
−
** Wet lab work and computationally based aspects.  The problems we consider will be amenable to both laboratory and computational research methods.  It's widely acknowledged that computational research is an important new direction for basic scientific understanding in a wide range of disciplines.  By working the same problem from both perspectives, students will gain a deeper understanding of the issues at hand and learn about the relationship between the different research methodologies.
 
−
** Interdisciplinary.  Within the sciences at Earlham this is a given, we want to learn how we got here and figure-out how to spread the word.  All of the threads and projects we are considering would offer the ability for most, if not all, of the science division departments to participate in meaningful ways.
 
−
** Locally rooted.  The expression "think globally, act locally" is as true for scientists as it is anyone.  One aspect of this is to choose a thread and projects that build on our local expertise.  Another important aspect is working in our local environment--be it back campus, a reservoir, or a farmer's fields.  Local research projects are much easier to integrate into the curriculum and to maintain year-round.  Working locally would also make it much easier to do long-term data collection and monitoring.
 
  
−
* Ideas we have considered as problem areas, or threads, that would run through the science curriculum and our research in a variety of departments and classes:
+
* Interdisciplinary science curriculum modules tied to on-going student-faculty research projects across the natural sciences.  These interdisciplinary research projects would build on the foundation provided for by our recent HHMI grant.  More about this idea can be found below.
−
** Pesticides: Building on local expertise developed in studying the concentration and effects of atrazine in groundwater, we would propose studying pesticides in the Richmond area.  Possible areas of investigation might include determination of concentrations, computational modeling of distribution, effects on area plant and animal life, and evaluation of pesticide degradation products.
 
−
** Metals:  The environmental impact of local industry and geology on ground water sources would be studied using such methods computational modeling, analytical techniques, and effects/evidence of metal uptake by plants or aquatic life.
 
−
** Proteins, DNA, or another biomolecule: The relationship of structure to function is particularly important in many biomolecules.  We would propose investigating both the computed and experimentally determined 3-dimensional structure of a particular biomolecule, comparing and evaluating them for consistency with the function of the protein.
 
−
** Question for Keck: Are they more or less attracted to any of these in particular? There are others we could develop, this list was put together relatively quickly.
 
  
−
* Outcomes:
+
* Planetarium.  Astronomy and outreach are two recurring themes in Keck's history. Given the museum's track-record, and the outreach potential for a planitarium, it seems logical that we should explore how they might help with our upcoming facilities project.  Ray's plan for the planetarium is to use digital technology which would allow it to be used for a variety of science and non-science displays.
−
** Research projects and curriculum modules for a variety of introductory and upper-level classes.
 
−
** For science and non-science majors, a better understanding of both computational and experimental research methods, model development and verification, and interdisciplinary science research.  For example, students in both majors and non-majors versions of general chemistry should come away with some understanding of how computational methods, and chemistry, and biology, and geology, work together to deepen our understanding of the problem.
 
−
** Science outreach activities for local K-12 students and teachers.  Earlham's Joseph Moore Museum has developed a significant outreach program for local school districts.  We propose to develop an analog to that program, based on the same thread, for science more generally. 
 
−
** Introduce students to scientific problems which incorporate local and regional issues and resources.
 
  
−
* Selling points:
+
Background material related to Keck and these proposals:
−
** Computational methods are now an important part of basic research in all of the natural sciences, yet few undergraduate programs have such components.  Earlham is very well positioned to develop a template for incorporating computational methods into science curricula, e.g. our interdisciplinary approach and the high percentage of our graduates that go on to earn Ph.D.s in a science.
+
*Keck's [[KeckCriteria|criteria]] from their programatic guidelines.
−
** It is difficult to obtain funding from government agencies, e.g. the NSF, for cross disciplinary work such as we describe here.  This puts Keck in a somewhat unique position as a sponsor for this project.
+
*[[QuestionsFAQ|Questions and FAQ.]]
 +
*Things [[ToDo|to do.]]
  
−
* Keck's programmatic criteria from their program guidelines:
+
==Interdisciplinary Science Curriculum Modules==
−
** Significant programs and projects that:
 
−
*** focus on emerging areas of research at the forefront of science, engineering and medicine, or have the potential to lead to breakthrough technologies in these areas; or
 
−
*** establish new directions and utilize creative approaches in education and research for the liberal arts and sciences at predominantly undergraduate institutions
 
−
*** Programs that respond to a compelling need and have the potential to create a significant and long-lasting impact
 
−
*** Programs and projects that are consistent with the Foundation's stated fields of interest
 
−
*** Programs and projects that demonstrate that the chances of success would be seriously impaired but for the assistance of private philanthropy generally, and the W.M. Keck Foundation in particular
 
−
*** Programs and projects that encourage self-sufficiency rather than continuing dependence on W.M. Keck Foundation support
 
  
−
* Questions:
+
This project will focus on interdisciplinary collaboration and curriculum development among the natural and physical sciences departments at Earlham College, including biology, chemistry, computer science, geosciences, mathematics, and physics.  It is clear that cutting-edge scientific research is becoming more interdisciplinary and collaborative at all levels; therefore, it is essential to train our students to develop multi-faceted approaches to problem solving.  This project will introduce an important scientific problem and ask students to collect and analyze data, as well as make interpretations, using different disciplinary perspectives in both coursework and independent research projects with faculty.  We believe this idea of collaborative learning will transform our undergraduate curriculum in the sciences and provide a model for interdisciplinary curricula for other liberal arts colleges.
−
** Are pesticides the best choice of a common thread?
 
−
*** Lori - Seems to me--but then again, that is the one I feel clearest on what it would involve.  It seems like it incorporates many disciplines (not everyone, but I think it will be hard to have a project that truly includes every single person/discipline).
 
−
*** Mike and Corinne - We think that metal might be a stronger project for the initial phase for several reasons:
 
−
**** We have both faculty (Corinne, Mike and Ron) with extensive metal analysis background/publication record
 
−
**** We have the equipment currently in place to analyze metals in a variety of matrices (to perform state of the art pesticide analysis, particularly metabolites, would require an LC-MS - $200,000)
 
−
**** Sample storage/processing is very easy and stable over time, which allows better integration into our curriculum (this is not true for pesticides which require very time sensitive processing/storage).
 
−
** Barbara is going to check to see if facilities, new or renovations, or equipment, are appropriate for Keck.
 
−
*** Keck does not fund endowment.   
 
−
*** There's nothing that I can find that says that they do not fund construction or renovation, but if we look at their funded projects over the past couple of years for undergraduate research and liberal arts colleges, the construction was limited to a planetarium and to a greenhouse.  So, it doesn't seem to me that a large capital request for facilities would be in order.   
 
−
*** As to renovation, it doesn't appear to me to be high on their hit list either.   
 
−
*** Equipment, on the other hand, is listed multiple times as fundable.  So, equipment related to your project would be very appropriate.
 
  
−
* Things to do:
+
In choosing the scientific problem around which to construct this project, we have tried to generate topics centered around faculty expertise, student interest, and local impact.  We anticipate that if this approach is successful, both scientifically and educationally, we would be able to expand topics to reflect the changing interests of students, faculty, and the community.  Therefore, our selection of the research problem is purposefully flexible, although any topic must meet the following explicit criteria:
−
** Check that we have addressed all of the feedback (negative and positive) we received from Keck on our last proposal.
+
* It must be broadly relevant to the scientific community (research results should be publishable in more than one venue).
−
** Tighten-up and possibly expand the list of threads.
+
* It must be easily adapted to both student/faculty research and the undergraduate science curriculum.
−
*** For this round we're ok with the pesticide and metals, when Amy gets back we should  work on the biomolecule entry. Continue looking for other threads particularly with Fonsie.
+
* It must involve field work, laboratory work, and computational analysis.
−
** Complete "Selling points" section, match-up items with Keck's criteria.
+
* It must be interdisciplinary in nature.
 +
* It must have local impact or be important to the local community.
  
−
* Fonsie's work:
+
We have considered two topics that meet the above criteria as themes with which to begin the development of this project:
−
** Condensded matter physics - groups of atoms in regular arrays and the phenonema associated with that.  Nanotechnology, thin films, carbon nanotubes?, 100 NM line width lithography, vaccum systems associated with growing thin films, electron transport and temperature, materials in the read/write head and disk coating, i.e. spintronics the replacement for GMR.  Not much interdisciplinary stuff, measured the dielectric of polymers, photolithography.
+
 
 +
* Pesticides and Herbicides: Building on local expertise developed in studying the concentration and effects of atrazine in groundwater, we would propose studying pesticides in the Richmond area. Possible areas of investigation might include determination of concentrations, computational modeling of distribution, effects on area plant and animal life, and evaluation of pesticide degradation products.  We propose to do our studies in Clear Creek, adjacent to and running through Earlham's campus.  Among other things this local connection will enable us to easily integrate the field work into lab classes. 
 +
 
 +
* Metals: The environmental impact of local industry and geology on ground water sources would be studied using such methods computational modeling, analytical techniques, and effects/evidence of metal uptake by plants or aquatic life.  Again we could employ Clear Creek as our study site.  Snapping turtles are potential heavy metal reservoirs, as such they would provide us with one particularly good angle with which to approach this which builds on significant faculty expertise.
 +
 
 +
Outcomes:
 +
* Research projects and curriculum modules for a variety of introductory and upper-level classes.
 +
 
 +
* For science and non-science majors, a better understanding of both computational and experimental research methods, model development and verification, and interdisciplinary science research.  For example, students in both majors and non-majors versions of general chemistry should come away with some understanding of how computational methods, chemistry, biology, and geology, work together to deepen our understanding of the problem.
 +
 
 +
* Science outreach activities for local K-12 students and teachers.  Earlham's Joseph Moore Museum has developed a significant outreach program for local school districts in the natural sciences.  We propose to develop new programs, based on the project theme, to be delivered by the Museum. 
 +
 
 +
* Introduce students to scientific problems which incorporate local and regional issues and resources.
 +
 
 +
Selling points:
 +
* Computational methods are now an important part of basic research in all of the natural sciences, yet few undergraduate programs have such components.  Earlham is very well positioned to develop a template for incorporating computational methods into science curricula, e.g. our interdisciplinary approach and the high percentage of our graduates that go on to earn Ph.D.s in a science.
 +
 
 +
* It is difficult to obtain funding from government agencies, e.g. the NSF, for cross disciplinary work such as we describe here.  This puts Keck in a somewhat unique position as a sponsor for this project.
 +
 
 +
==Planetarium==
 +
 
 +
The Keck Foundation has traditionally supported astronomy research, education, and outreach as demonstrated by their funding of the Keck Observatory in Hawaii and their recent funding of a planetarium. Earlham also has a strong record of interest and accomplishment in astronomy research, education, and outreach. Our Descriptive Astronomy course is taken by almost one-half of the students at the College and many of our physics majors go on to do research in astronomy in graduate school.
 +
 
 +
The goals of the Keck Foundation and the needs of Earlham College would appear to find a perfect match in the funding of a new state-of-the-art planetarium for Earlham College.  The proposed planetarium would actually be a multipurpose digital theatre with some 60-80 theatre type seats and would make use of the latest technology in digital planetarium projectors which have now revolutionized the art of planetarium projection.  The planetarium-theatre would be part of a renovated or new Joseph Moore Museum.  In addition to giving planetarium shows with the latest technology in animated digital graphics, the theatre could also be used for lectures and for digital projection or conventional film showing involving any topic.
 +
 
 +
The planetarium would contribute to the science education mission of Earlham in the following respects
 +
 
 +
* (1) It would vastly improve astronomy education (roughly 150 students per year take astronomy) in an environment where a clear sky is seldom available for study. This would make a very major impact on our general science education program since astronomy is taken by almost half of our non-science majors. The generally hazy skies at Earlham make research-grade observation and first-hand observation of the sky very difficult.  Consequently a planetarium represents a more useful and practical investment for astronomy education than new observatory facilities.  Such a facility is rare among liberal arts colleges and would enable Earlham to become a leader in developing this kind of science education.
 +
 
 +
* (2) A planetarium facility generally becomes one of the most popular of museum programs and so would greatly enhance the impact and outreach capability of our already well-developed Joseph Moore Science Museum.
 +
 
 +
* (3) A planetarium facility would have a very large value for educational outreach both to area students of all ages and prospective students. Currently the local school system rents a small, inflatable planetarium to teach local school children.  The proposed Earlham planetarium would represent a dramatic step forward beyond that and presumably increase the quality of science education for all students in our area.
 +
 
 +
* (4) A planetarium facility could be used as a multi-media auditorium for the museum and the college at large when not being used for planetarium shows.  It would provide 360 degree projection capability for shows in say geology, biology, or for the arts.
 +
 
 +
* (5) The computer control and the small upkeep required for such a facility means that the expense of operation is small and no additional technical staff is required since students could be trained as planetarium operators.  This means that our MAT teaching program would have a first-rate facility for training future teachers and local outreach projects.
 +
 
 +
I believe that a quality planetarium would be in such demand that it would be in use virtually all the time either for astronomy courses at the College or local educational outreach.  I would estimate its cost as being on the order of $1-2 million but with little expense after that.  I think its educational benefit would make it very cost effective over time in spite of the large initial cost.

Latest revision as of 04:22, 21 September 2005

September 21, 2005

This document is a set of ideas and talking points, one developed by Science Division/Science Friday group and one developed by Ray Hively, concerning what types of support Earlham might approach the W.M. Keck Foundation for.

Broadly speaking there are two areas of approach, which may or may not be mutually exclusive:

  • Interdisciplinary science curriculum modules tied to on-going student-faculty research projects across the natural sciences. These interdisciplinary research projects would build on the foundation provided for by our recent HHMI grant. More about this idea can be found below.
  • Planetarium. Astronomy and outreach are two recurring themes in Keck's history. Given the museum's track-record, and the outreach potential for a planitarium, it seems logical that we should explore how they might help with our upcoming facilities project. Ray's plan for the planetarium is to use digital technology which would allow it to be used for a variety of science and non-science displays.

Background material related to Keck and these proposals:

Interdisciplinary Science Curriculum Modules

This project will focus on interdisciplinary collaboration and curriculum development among the natural and physical sciences departments at Earlham College, including biology, chemistry, computer science, geosciences, mathematics, and physics. It is clear that cutting-edge scientific research is becoming more interdisciplinary and collaborative at all levels; therefore, it is essential to train our students to develop multi-faceted approaches to problem solving. This project will introduce an important scientific problem and ask students to collect and analyze data, as well as make interpretations, using different disciplinary perspectives in both coursework and independent research projects with faculty. We believe this idea of collaborative learning will transform our undergraduate curriculum in the sciences and provide a model for interdisciplinary curricula for other liberal arts colleges.

In choosing the scientific problem around which to construct this project, we have tried to generate topics centered around faculty expertise, student interest, and local impact. We anticipate that if this approach is successful, both scientifically and educationally, we would be able to expand topics to reflect the changing interests of students, faculty, and the community. Therefore, our selection of the research problem is purposefully flexible, although any topic must meet the following explicit criteria:

  • It must be broadly relevant to the scientific community (research results should be publishable in more than one venue).
  • It must be easily adapted to both student/faculty research and the undergraduate science curriculum.
  • It must involve field work, laboratory work, and computational analysis.
  • It must be interdisciplinary in nature.
  • It must have local impact or be important to the local community.

We have considered two topics that meet the above criteria as themes with which to begin the development of this project:

  • Pesticides and Herbicides: Building on local expertise developed in studying the concentration and effects of atrazine in groundwater, we would propose studying pesticides in the Richmond area. Possible areas of investigation might include determination of concentrations, computational modeling of distribution, effects on area plant and animal life, and evaluation of pesticide degradation products. We propose to do our studies in Clear Creek, adjacent to and running through Earlham's campus. Among other things this local connection will enable us to easily integrate the field work into lab classes.
  • Metals: The environmental impact of local industry and geology on ground water sources would be studied using such methods computational modeling, analytical techniques, and effects/evidence of metal uptake by plants or aquatic life. Again we could employ Clear Creek as our study site. Snapping turtles are potential heavy metal reservoirs, as such they would provide us with one particularly good angle with which to approach this which builds on significant faculty expertise.

Outcomes:

  • Research projects and curriculum modules for a variety of introductory and upper-level classes.
  • For science and non-science majors, a better understanding of both computational and experimental research methods, model development and verification, and interdisciplinary science research. For example, students in both majors and non-majors versions of general chemistry should come away with some understanding of how computational methods, chemistry, biology, and geology, work together to deepen our understanding of the problem.
  • Science outreach activities for local K-12 students and teachers. Earlham's Joseph Moore Museum has developed a significant outreach program for local school districts in the natural sciences. We propose to develop new programs, based on the project theme, to be delivered by the Museum.
  • Introduce students to scientific problems which incorporate local and regional issues and resources.

Selling points:

  • Computational methods are now an important part of basic research in all of the natural sciences, yet few undergraduate programs have such components. Earlham is very well positioned to develop a template for incorporating computational methods into science curricula, e.g. our interdisciplinary approach and the high percentage of our graduates that go on to earn Ph.D.s in a science.
  • It is difficult to obtain funding from government agencies, e.g. the NSF, for cross disciplinary work such as we describe here. This puts Keck in a somewhat unique position as a sponsor for this project.

Planetarium

The Keck Foundation has traditionally supported astronomy research, education, and outreach as demonstrated by their funding of the Keck Observatory in Hawaii and their recent funding of a planetarium. Earlham also has a strong record of interest and accomplishment in astronomy research, education, and outreach. Our Descriptive Astronomy course is taken by almost one-half of the students at the College and many of our physics majors go on to do research in astronomy in graduate school.

The goals of the Keck Foundation and the needs of Earlham College would appear to find a perfect match in the funding of a new state-of-the-art planetarium for Earlham College. The proposed planetarium would actually be a multipurpose digital theatre with some 60-80 theatre type seats and would make use of the latest technology in digital planetarium projectors which have now revolutionized the art of planetarium projection. The planetarium-theatre would be part of a renovated or new Joseph Moore Museum. In addition to giving planetarium shows with the latest technology in animated digital graphics, the theatre could also be used for lectures and for digital projection or conventional film showing involving any topic.

The planetarium would contribute to the science education mission of Earlham in the following respects

  • (1) It would vastly improve astronomy education (roughly 150 students per year take astronomy) in an environment where a clear sky is seldom available for study. This would make a very major impact on our general science education program since astronomy is taken by almost half of our non-science majors. The generally hazy skies at Earlham make research-grade observation and first-hand observation of the sky very difficult. Consequently a planetarium represents a more useful and practical investment for astronomy education than new observatory facilities. Such a facility is rare among liberal arts colleges and would enable Earlham to become a leader in developing this kind of science education.
  • (2) A planetarium facility generally becomes one of the most popular of museum programs and so would greatly enhance the impact and outreach capability of our already well-developed Joseph Moore Science Museum.
  • (3) A planetarium facility would have a very large value for educational outreach both to area students of all ages and prospective students. Currently the local school system rents a small, inflatable planetarium to teach local school children. The proposed Earlham planetarium would represent a dramatic step forward beyond that and presumably increase the quality of science education for all students in our area.
  • (4) A planetarium facility could be used as a multi-media auditorium for the museum and the college at large when not being used for planetarium shows. It would provide 360 degree projection capability for shows in say geology, biology, or for the arts.
  • (5) The computer control and the small upkeep required for such a facility means that the expense of operation is small and no additional technical staff is required since students could be trained as planetarium operators. This means that our MAT teaching program would have a first-rate facility for training future teachers and local outreach projects.

I believe that a quality planetarium would be in such demand that it would be in use virtually all the time either for astronomy courses at the College or local educational outreach. I would estimate its cost as being on the order of $1-2 million but with little expense after that. I think its educational benefit would make it very cost effective over time in spite of the large initial cost.

Retrieved from "https://wiki.cs.earlham.edu/index.php?title=Keck_Foundation_Proposal&oldid=5353"