Difference between revisions of "Keck-presentation"

From Earlham CS Department
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 2: Line 2:
 
 
 
II) Why Earlham (Charlie 15 min)
 
II) Why Earlham (Charlie 15 min)
Notes
+
*Notes
*re-read grant RFP
+
**re-read grant RFP
*re-read grant proposal
+
**re-read grant proposal
*paul's one pager on the history of student/faculty research at earlham
+
**paul's one pager on the history of student/faculty research at earlham
*timed run-through  
+
**timed run-through  
  
Why Earlham?
 
 
*How much time spent with small liberal arts colleges?  Answer dictates level of coverage in different parts of what follows.
 
*How much time spent with small liberal arts colleges?  Answer dictates level of coverage in different parts of what follows.
  
Line 27: Line 26:
 
**Selectivity
 
**Selectivity
 
**Curriculum
 
**Curriculum
***liberal arts, distribution requirements (new language)
+
***Liberal arts, distribution requirements (new language)
***science a part of everyone's course of study
+
***Science a part of everyone's course of study
****actual details of the requirements
+
****Actual details of the requirements
****more below on our majors  
+
****More below on our majors  
  
 
*Science division  
 
*Science division  
**our cohesiveness and collective strength
+
**Our cohesiveness and collective strength
***multidisc exp
+
***Multidisciplinary experience
**major strength to PhD
+
**Science major to PhD strength
***particular departments
+
***Numbers for particular departments
***overlap w/ major/minors  
+
***Overlap w/ major/minors
**student/faculty research experience (history, current)
+
**Multidisciplinary applied science groups
 +
***Hardware interfacing project
 +
***Cluster computing group
 +
***Green Science
 +
**Student/faculty research experience (history, current)
 
**Computational Experience
 
**Computational Experience
 
***Folding@Home
 
***Folding@Home
 
***Computational Economics  
 
***Computational Economics  
 
***LittleFe and SC Education
 
***LittleFe and SC Education
**Instrumentation and Experience
+
**Instrumentation and experience with it
 +
***Enumerate - ESM, Laser,
 
**Pedagogical creativity experience
 
**Pedagogical creativity experience
+
 
 
*Closing
 
*Closing
  

Revision as of 15:44, 24 September 2006

I) Who we are (Mike 5 min)

II) Why Earlham (Charlie 15 min)

  • Notes
    • re-read grant RFP
    • re-read grant proposal
    • paul's one pager on the history of student/faculty research at earlham
    • timed run-through
  • How much time spent with small liberal arts colleges? Answer dictates level of coverage in different parts of what follows.
  • Tension between Quaker modesty and our desire to put the best facia on our college and our people.
  • Overview of Earlham
    • 1847, Quakers were a large portion of the early settlers to this area
    • Liberal arts with masters in teaching and seminaries
    • Quaker
      • Governance
      • Student/faculty interactions
    • Teaching first and formost
  • Student Body
    • International
    • Diversity (science in particular)
      • Efforts to improve enrollments in STEM disciplines
    • Selectivity
    • Curriculum
      • Liberal arts, distribution requirements (new language)
      • Science a part of everyone's course of study
        • Actual details of the requirements
        • More below on our majors
  • Science division
    • Our cohesiveness and collective strength
      • Multidisciplinary experience
    • Science major to PhD strength
      • Numbers for particular departments
      • Overlap w/ major/minors
    • Multidisciplinary applied science groups
      • Hardware interfacing project
      • Cluster computing group
      • Green Science
    • Student/faculty research experience (history, current)
    • Computational Experience
      • Folding@Home
      • Computational Economics
      • LittleFe and SC Education
    • Instrumentation and experience with it
      • Enumerate - ESM, Laser,
    • Pedagogical creativity experience
  • Closing

III) Why Project (Ron 10 min)

IV) What Project (50 min total)

  • Goals and Objectives Mike (5 min), or as part of Why Project
  • Courses (Mike 5 min)
    • Intro: Gen Chem (Mike 10 min)
    • Upper: Geology (Ron 10 min)
  • Break
  • Research: Biology (David 10 min)
  • Seminars (Meg 5 min)
  • Dissemination/Evaluation (Lori 5 min)

Dissemination activities will include:

• NITLE workshop on integrating multi-disciplinary computational methods into the undergraduate science curriculum. We have already arranged with the National Institute for Technology and Liberal Education (NITLE) to offer a workshop for our peers where we will describe what we have done and offer suggestions for how similar programs can be implemented at their institutions.

• Earlham Science Poster Session (held each Fall)

• Student presentation of papers at regional and national scientific conferences (Butler Undergraduate Research Conference, Geological Society of America, American Chemical Society, etc).

• CUR publications and programs

• Student/Faculty papers in science pedagogy journals and basic science journals, as appropriate.

Evaluation will include:

• External evaluation both during and at the conclusion of the grant period

• Qualitative evaluation: open-ended surveys, interviews

• Quantitative evaluation: quantitative surveys, pre and post grant levels of undergraduate research, curricular use of computational modeling and interdisciplinary projects

V) Why Keck (Lori 5 min)

Why Keck:

• Long tradition of supporting curricular innovation: Funding for undergraduate research at small liberal arts colleges is limited. The W.M. Keck Foundation is known and respected throughout the scientific community as a foundation that supports innovative science programs at high-quality libral arts institutions.

• Limited sources of support for such a comprehensive multidisciplinary program: Most sources support only limited interdisciplinary work (bio and chem., for example) and most do not support such work at undergraduate institutions


• NSF funding for science education at 4yr institutions has been flat for past 10 years and curricular improvements funding has decreased by 50% over same timeframe


• Strong supporter of computational science education: the Keck Undergraduate Computational Science Education Consortium headed by Capital University.

• Keck support would also raise the visibility of the sciences regionally and nationally.

Wrap-up: Review, questions, tour next (Mike 5 min)