Category Archives: Teaching and learning

Cantor’s Dilemma, inappropriate relationships, and the emotional dimensions of mentorship.

Posted on by


Near the end of the “Ethics in Science” course I teach, we read the novel Cantor’s Dilemma by Carl Djerassi. It does a nice job of tying together a lot of different issues we talk about earlier in the term. Plus, it’s a novel.

While it’s more enjoyable reading than the slew of journal articles that precede it, Cantor’s Dilemma is a little jarring for the students at first, because it contains whole passages that aren’t directly relevant to the question of how to be a responsible scientist. As one of my students synopsized: “Science. Sex. Science. Sex. Science. Sex.”

Upon reflection, though, I think at least some of the “novelistic” relationships in this novel really do have something to say about the nature of the scientific life. Explaining it is going to require some spoilers, though, so if you haven’t read the novel and don’t want me spoiling it for you, go read it before you click the link for the rest of the post!

Continue reading→

Reviewing a couple wee guides to critical thinking.

Posted on by

One of the first things that happens when you get a faculty mailbox in a philosophy department is that unsolicited items start appearing in it. There are the late student papers, the book catalogs, the religious tracts — and occasionally, actual books that, it is hoped, you will like well enough that you will exhort all your students to buy them (perhaps by requiring them for your classes).

Today, I’m going to give you my review of two little books that appeared in my faculty mailbox, both from The Foundation for Critical Thinking. The first is The Miniature Guide to Critical Thinking Concepts and Tools, the second The Thinker’s Guide to Fallacies: The Art of Mental Trickery and Manipulation, both written by Richard Paul and Linda Elder.

Continue reading→

Those deadly chemistry sets.

Posted on by

Months ago, I wrote about the Department of Homeland Security’s concerns about chemistry sets. (You know, for kids.) Well, it seems the push to make the world child-safe (or perhaps not legally actionable?) continues.
Reader Donn Young points me to this story from Wired about government crackdowns on companies catering to garage chemistry enthusiasts. Donn also shares a story of his own:

Growing up, two friends and I had a chemistry ‘club’ centered around our chemistry sets and ‘labs’ in our basements. My friend’s mother, who was a chemist at Battelle Memorial Institute, would give us short monthly talks about famous chemists, have us do an experiment based on some important principle, and as the grand finale [which kept the interest of 11-year olds] gave a demo of some greatly exothermic reaction – the loud noises, colored fire, billowing smoke, and smell were impressive – in a time of no smoke detectors! It resulted in two of us getting degrees in chemistry [her own son became an investment banker – go figure]. We all held her in awe because she could get us chemicals that were really strong oxidizers, powerful acids, or toxic [and we all survived because she taught us lab safety as well – goggles, gloves & a plexiglas shield saved my eyesight when my hydrogen generator blew up – I was curious to see what color a pure hydrogen flame would burn].
The current movement to squelch a kid’s curiosity in a basement lab with a chemistry set doesn’t seem to bode well for the future of the field

Given my present position as ScienceBlogs resident chemist, I ought to weigh in on this.

Continue reading→

Yet another sign that doing research may be of use in writing final papers.

Posted on by

I’m marking another stack of papers (because it’s May, and the sun is shining, and apparently I was a real bastard in some previous life).
In these papers, the students were supposed to examine an instance where the interests of scientists and the interests of non-scientists (perhaps various subgroups of non-scientists) might be at odds. The idea is to explain the source of the conflict, connect this to the various values of the different players, and to set out possible strategies for resolving the conflict. It was stressed that giving a fair presentation of each side’s view is key.
Quite a number of the students elected to write about the battles over teaching evolution and/or intelligent design in public school science class. Some of these papers have been quite good, but in a few cases I’m fairly certain nothing like careful research occurred in conjunction with the writing of the papers.

Continue reading→

Get-rich-quick ideas for hungry inventors (end-of-semester edition).

Posted on by

Dear inventors,
My personal experience (and what I have heard from the many other academics with whom I communicate) suggests a number of inventions that would sell a bazillion units at colleges and universities world-wide. For your convenience, I list the items that would have the biggest demand first. However, it’s worth noting that even the items at the bottom of the list would make professorial lives significantly better, and that we would gladly dip into the funds currently allocated for recreational reading and hooch to purchase them.

Continue reading→

Teaching Carnival #9: Are we done with the term yet?

Posted on by

Welcome to Teaching Carnival #9. I realize that you, gentle reader, may be affiliated with a school whose term has already ended. You may be easing into those first intoxicating weeks of the summer break, where your “to do” list seems more theoretical and less urgent.
Academic calendars are somewhat arbitrary, so I know it’s not your fault, but I’ll thank you not to gloat. Some of us are in the End Times right now, hoping that our post-apocalyptic world resembles a summer break.
It may be too soon to call it.
In any event, this Teaching Carnival is dedicated to the teachers and learners who are racing toward the end and trying to make the last minute count.

Continue reading→

Teaching Carnival call for submissions.

Posted on by

Next Friday (May 12), I will be hosting Teaching Carnival #9, right here. The Teaching Carnival encompasses the many aspects of teaching, learning, and figuring out why it all matters, in the realm of higher education.
I especially encourage submissions about teaching or learning science in higher education. Also, since for may the term will be over (or drawing to a close) by mid-May, I’d be interested to see posts about how well pedagogical innovations worked (or didn’t), or what you would do differently if you could live the term over.
Undoubtedly, there will also be posts about the horrors of grading. They’re welcome, too.
Submission procedures below the fold:

Continue reading→

Getting ideas from Donald Trump? (An oldie from the vault.)

Posted on by

Hey, it’s May already! Could that explain why things are crazy-busy here?
There will be new content soon, once I’ve plowed through some more grading and exam-writing and curricular trouble-shooting. In the meantime, since I copped to enjoying reality TV more than I should (in that ABC meme, under “Not going to cop to”), I thought I’d share a May post from the earlier incarnation of this blog, a post in which I muse on what “The Apprentice” (a show, as of this season, I no longer watch … we’ve grown apart) might teach us about how to improve the scientific community.
Yes, it’s utterly daft. So what are you waiting for?

Continue reading→

Scientific knowledge for the masses.

Posted on by

Over at Evolgen, RPM links to an article that lists ten “basic questions” to which ten different scientists think high school graduates should know the answers. (It was one question from each scientist, so it’s unclear whether all ten would agree that they are the ten most important questions, or even that all ten of these scientists could answer all ten to the others’ satisfaction.) RPM opines that the list seems heavy on trivia (or at least seemingly random facts) and light on really helpful scientific knowledge. He writes:

Let’s focus on two things: the hypothetical deductive method and essential information that you must know to be able to read the science section of a newspaper.

Well, I’m a bandwagon jumper-upon of long standing, so let me add some items I’d like the masses to be able to take on:

Continue reading→

Email etiquette — shouldn’t some of this be obvious?

Posted on by

You may recall that a couple months ago the New York Times ran this piece on the habits of students who email their professors. Today, there’s something of a follow-up at Inside Higher Ed. The upshot seems to be that being polite, and especially not assuming an overly-familiar tone towards one’s professor simply because one is using email, is a good idea.
Given that, frequently, emails to one’s professor are intended to get something (information about an assignment, an extension, etc.), I would have thought this was kind of obvious. Is rudeness a good strategy for getting someone to give you something he or she doesn’t have to give you?
Perhaps, though, I overestimate the size of the “no-brainer” terrain on electronic communication. A blog-related example after the break:

Continue reading→