 |
Connections Home Page |
|
|
URI Home Page | |
CONNECTIONS Online Resource Center |
|
Women's Studies, Science and
Engineering Curriculum Project Annual Report for July 1998-July 1999 The Women's Studies, Science and Engineering Curriculum Project at the University of Rhode Island had an active and productive year. Events sponsored by the Project were popular and attracted a diverse audience from seven colleges within the University and other universities in the state. The Project was popular with the administration, receiving financial support in several ways and enthusiastic compliments. The six main activities of the year (July 98-July99) were:
Summer 1998 Reading Group Fifteen women participated in the Summer 1998 Reading Group. After discussion with Joan Shapiro during her visit to URI, we decided to read Women's Ways for Knowing: The Development of Self, Voice and Mind. This choice was strongly supported by Bette Erickson, URI's instructional specialist because she was able to see how the book described not only women's intellectual development, thereby giving faculty members insight into student learning, but describe the process of curriculum revision. From 1 June 1 through 5 August participants discussed the book, chapter by chapter. Initially, I tried to get a discussion of each week's chapters going on the email list. At first, there were a few contributions, but the participants seemed to prefer saving their comments for the bi-weekly lunch discussions that were held at the University Club. Summer 1998 Curriculum Development Grants In Summer 1998, the Women's Studies, Science and Engineering Curriculum Project awarded six $1000.00 Faculty Development Incentive Grants. Two of the awards were funded by the AAC&U money and four were funded by the College of Arts and Sciences. The goal of this initiative was to promote curriculum transformation through 1) the integration of social context, especially scholarship on gender, into courses in the sciences, mathematics and engineering; 2) the pedagogical reform in the sciences, mathematics and engineering that will engage students in their learning, and encourage critical and analytical thinking; 3) introduction of new methodologies and epistemologies in the sciences, mathematics and engineering; and 4) the integration of science and mathematics, and critiques of science and technology into social science and humanities courses, especially in Women's Studies. The Call for Proposals was distributed to all faculty all campus. The Associate Dean of the College of Arts and Science and I served as the review committee for the awards. We had ten applications, four from faculty members with no previous association with the Project, resulting is two more women joining the Project through the application process and then, the Summer reading group. Four awards went to faculty members from the College of Arts and Sciences (the Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences stipulated that her money only be used to fund awards in the College), one award to a faculty member from the College of Engineering, and the last to a faculty member from the School of Pharmacy. The six awards were:
Panel Presentation at URI Diversity Week Donna M. Hughes, Joan Peckham, Lisa Harlow and Betty Young gave a panel presentation on gender/women and science and engineering during URI Diversity Week, October 1998. Spring 1999 Conference The theme and title of our Spring 1999 conference, held on 6-7 April 1999, was Diversifying the Culture and Curriculum of Science, Engineering and Women's Studies. Invited speakers were Angela Ginorio, "The Importance of Meaningful Communities to Women and Ethnic Minorities in Science and Engineering;" Judy Meuth, "Science in Women's Studies: Combining the Scientific Method, Laboratory Exercises and Feminist Epistemology;" Lynn Andrea Stein, "Cultural Revolutions in Computer Science;" and Fatimah Linda Collier Jackson, "Changing the Scientific Paradigm: Lessons Learned from the Human Genome Project." There was also a panel of internal speakers from the Project, some of whom described work they had done with money from the Summer 1998 Curriculum Development Grants. The speakers were from the following departments: Biomedical Sciences, Electrical Engineering, Psychology, and Languages (German and Engineering Program). See Appendix B for the conference brochure. The conference was co-sponsored by the Honors and Visiting Scholars Program and the Rhode Island Partnership for Research on Women and Gender. The Provost hosted the dinner prior to the conference for three of the speakers and several Project members. Approximately 200 people attended the conference, with each session drawing a different audience. (Seventy people attended the evening lecture and 30-50 people attended each lecture the following day.) Evaluations were distributed for each speaker at the conference. Betty Young, Associate Professor, Education tabulated the responses. The response to all of the speakers was overwhelmingly positive. See Appendix C for summaries of the responses. Also, the conference was videotaped. One copy of the tapes will be kept in the Women's Studies library, one copy will be donated to the Media Library at the University Library, and one copy will be sent to the Association of American Colleges and Universities. Individual Curricular Revision Projects A. Marian Goldsmith, Professor, Biological Sciences Marian Goldsmith developed a new three-credit seminar entitled A Study of the Human Genome Project (BIO 491) in the Department of Biological Sciences. The course was taught for the first time in Spring 99. The course is open to both non-science and science majors. Students with little background in biology, genetics, or molecular biology can learn these subjects in a context, which is relevant to their own life goals and decisions. The course was graded as Satisfactory/Unsatisfactory. The course covers the science and technology underlying the international effort to sequence all human genes, with emphasis on social, political, gender, and ethical issues arising from the research and its applications. Background and Rationale for the Course: The purpose of this course is to teach basic principles of human genetics and molecular biology in a context that enables students to see how the practice of science is influenced by societal and cultural values, and to discover the relevance of its practices and findings to their own lives. The Human Genome Project (HGP) is a major international scientific initiative which was originally spearheaded by U.S. scientists in the mid-1980's to obtain the detailed molecular sequence of all human DNA (our hereditary material), find out what it does, and uncover associations between genes and clearcut hereditary disorders such as Huntington's chorea and cystic fibrosis, as well as with disorders with less pronounced hereditary components, such as cancer, diabetes and mental illness. Although the idea of using this information to improve diagnosis and develop treatments or cures based on detailed knowledge of the underlying biological mechanisms seems above reproach, the HGP was controversial from its inception, raising many scientific questions such as whether they could accomplish these goals given the complexity of gene function and its interaction with the environment. Perhaps of greater concern, the HGP raised acute ethical, political, gender, and social issues regarding access, privacy, ownership, and use of the new molecular genetic information, problems not new to the field of human genetics with its long and checkered history of eugenics. A recent statement of new goals for the HGP includes investigation of the genetic basis of human diversity; this moves it explicitly into the controversial area of the genetics of race. Finally, the history of how the HGP itself came into being and has been organized and funded in both the public and private sector provides an excellent model for considering the politics of science and technology within our society. Information is drawn from a range of sources, including professional journal and newspaper articles, essay collections, books, and websites. Emphasis is on scientific, personal, ethical, gender, and legal issues associated with human genetics and modern genetic and molecular genetic research. Topics depend in part on students' interests, and may include such subjects as the history and politics of the HGP and associated technologies, the history of eugenics, the biology of race, behavioral genetics, the economics and politics of the biotechnology industry, and the role of the media in reporting science and affecting public opinion and attitudes. History of the Course: The course was initially offered in Spring, 1999 as a single, weekly 3 hr session emphasizing oral presentations by small teams of students (1-3 each); 5 students were enrolled (3 men, 2 women). After a few meetings, the class decided together what general topics to cover. Teams were responsible for choosing or refining their topics, tracking down appropriate reading for the class, and making it available in advance. They were urged to plan their presentations to stimulate class discussion, and as a result came up with many innovative and creative techniques to achieve this, including posing questions, taking surveys of class opinions, attitudes, and knowledge, and setting up debates that required everyone to participate. This format resulted in many lively sessions on controversial or ethically charged subjects which were conducted with good grace and tolerance and seemed to stimulate considerable learning. During the semester we had three guest lecturers, either directly as part of the course (Donna Hughes) or as part of a wider university lecture series (Fatimah Jackson; Richard Lewontin). We devoted a class session to discussing a book about the author's involvement with a fatal genetic neurological disorder (Huntington's chorea) for which she is at risk and whose family was instrumental in the scientific effort to identify the gene. This highly personal account made a substantial impact on students, who urged its retention in the course. We also devoted a session to watching a Hollywood film (Gattaca) which portrays a future society in which genetic testing is mandatory and invasive, and which touches on many issues covered during the semester. B. Lisa Harlow, Professor, Psychology Lisa Harlow has implemented new pedagogy for Quantitative Methods in Psychology, collecting pre- and post-class data, and writing up the results for several conferences. a. Invited URI Instructional Development Workshop (1998, September) on "Getting Students Involved in Learning Multivariate Methods",PSY 615 m: Multivariate Concepts and Applications (Appendix A-3); b. Invited URI Diversity Workshop (1998, October) on "Getting Students Involved in Learning Science"; Symposium at Eastern Psychological Association (April, 1999) on "Learning Activities Rousing Noesis". (See Appendix A-4
D. Joan Peckham, Professor, Computer Science Dr. Joan Peckham has received support from the Women's studies Science and Engineering Curriculum Project to change the way in which the introductory breadth first computer science course (CSC 110) is taught: 1) Teams are formed at the beginning of the semester to work through classroom exercises. Formation of teams was based upon a survey taken of the students to judge their previous experiences in three areas; programming, writing/presenting, and solving problems. 2) Instructor spends much less time at the board explaining how to do exercises and teaching the material. 3) Students are given reading assignments that are expected to be read in advance of entering class. When they arrive in class, they ask questions and consult with the professor as to how much time is to be spent at the board versus team time solving problems. The instructor takes time in the middle of class once in a while to facilitate solving some problems with which the majority of the groups are having difficulty. 4) A sophomore major who has taken the class before is hired to assist in the enrollment and orientation of the incoming freshmen. The student is also a teaching assistant for the class, and thus assists with classes and labs, and is involved in the development of evaluation and teaching materials. 5) Each faculty member is brought into the classroom to talk to the students briefly about their areas of interest/research, and how they can serve as resources for the students in the department. This course was previously team taught by the faculty, as a regular lecture style classroom with no laboratory. Each professor in the department spent 1- 1/2 week teaching introductory material that related to his/her own research. The course was too intensive for most students and there was no opportunity for the students to develop a meaningful relationship with an individual faculty member. A graduate TA was used for grading, but frequently it was a TA with no undergraduate experience at the institution. There was no opportunity for the students to develop meaningful peer interactions in the classroom. Pluses: The students formed peer groups, read in advance of class at a much higher rate than in previous semester. Students were also much more interactive in class, asking many more questions than in the past. Minuses: We need to better preparing the students for the transition from CSC 110 to CSC 211 (their first programming class). Some of the issues include, teaching the student the differences in behavior expected in group problem solving assignments (as in the laboratory exercises) and the development of individual problem solving skills (as in individual programming assignments). We also need to pay attention to the difficulties that students experience in other hurdle classes such as mathematics and physics, thus using a more wholistic approach to retention. Curriculum Proposals submitted from the URI Team A number of faculty members at the University of Rhode Island are now enthusiastically committed to the retention of women in science and engineering and pedagogical reform in science, engineering and women's studies. In the last six months four grant proposals were submitted to federal and state agencies. "Enhancing Science and Engineering Education (ESEE)" submitted to the National Science Foundation
"Engineering and Science Empowerment (EASE)" submitted to Women's Educational Equity Act (WEEA) Program Principle Investigators: Lisa L. Harlow (Psychology), Donna M. Hughes (Women's Studies), Faye Boudreaux-Bartels (Electrical Engineering), Bette Erickson (Instructional Development) Linda Hufnagel (Microbiology), Joan Peckham (Computer Science), Mercedes Rivero-Hudec (Chemical Engineering), Betty Young (Education) Budget: $196,432 Project Summary/Goals: Multiple disciplines (e.g., computer science, education, chemical and electrical engineering, microbiology, psychology, women''s studies) will build on existing infrastructure to deliver a comprehensive program with the following objectives: 1. training, 2. implementing, and 3. mentoring, as well as evaluating, and disseminating regarding curriculum and pedagogy to bring about engineering and science empowerment (EASE), and to equalize the learning environment. "Multidisciplinary Science and Engineering Learning Communities for Students and Faculty" submitted to the National Science Foundation, Course, Curriculum and Laboratory Improvement Program.
Principal investigators: Donna M. Hughes (Women Studies); Lisa Harlow (Psychology); Joan Peckham, (Computer Science), Mecedes A. Rivero-Hudec, (Chemical Engineering), Faye Boudreaux-Bartels (Electrical Engineering) and Karen Stein (English and Women's Studies). Budget: 399,433 Project Overview, Goals and Objectives: Multidisciplinary Science and Engineering Learning Communities for Students and Faculty is comprised of four student learning communities (LCs), one year-long faculty LC, a peer mentor program that links all the LCs, and a conference to disseminate the findings and stimulate new ideas. The overall goals of the SMET learning communities are 1) attract more students, especially women, into SMET majors and courses; 2) increase retention of students, especially women in SMET majors; 3) foster confidence among students, especially women in SMET majors and courses; 4) connect women SMET majors to support networks of interdisciplinary faculty and peers; 5) increase learning through use of innovative, research-based teaching strategies; 6) increase understanding of innovative pedagogy to facilitate learning in highly technical SMET courses. We predict that the model LCs will catalyze institutional change at URI.
Additional Funding In addition to the funding from the Association of American Colleges and Universities, our project has received five additional grants to support our curriculum project. (All proposals were written by Donna M. Hughes.) They are:
In addition, the Provost M.Beverly Swan made a contribution to dinner for conference participants and guests. |
|
|
|
 Copyright © 1999 |
316 Eleanor Roosevelt Hall
Phone: 401-874-2757 Fax: 401-874-4527
E-Mail: dhughes@uri.edu
File last updated: Wednesday, January 05, 2000
The University is an affirmative action/equal opportunity employer.