Preliminary report to the faculty

On 30 November, we of the Core Curriculum Task Force made a preliminary report to the faculty on some of our recommendations for Caltech Core reform. The full preliminary report can be found here:

report-2Dec.pdf

Most of the discussion from the faculty involved the issues addressed in the appendix to the report where we outline some of the topics likely to generate controversy. Many of the faculty were sympathetic to the general philosophies proposed here.

A report to the full student body will be made on 3 December. Vigorous campus discussion will invariably ensue.

Why Peer Discussion Improves Student Performance on In-Class Concept Questions

Hey,

 

I found an interesting education research article in Science that is titled "Why Peer Discussion Improves Student Performance on In-Class Concept Questions."  I thought that this would be very relevant to our discussion about how to make Caltech core class teaching (and teaching at Caltech in general) more effective.

 

http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/323/5910/122

 

-Neal Bansal

Smaller Core Lectures with More Emphasis on Personalized, Interactive, and Collaborative Learning

Hey,
I came across this very interesting article on efforts by MIT and other
universities to redesign their introductory science courses. While the
approach is resource-intensive and would require a large commitment from
Caltech, it seems to be far more effective at raising and sustaining
attendance, engaging students during lecture, and improving overall
student understanding of concepts. I remember that there had been talk
earlier of switching our Core classes to individual sections, with a more
individual approach to learning rather than the large lecture format. I
don't know whether Caltech would be willing to invest in this, but it
seems like an effective approach that we should at least consider. Here
is the New York Times article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/13/us/13physics.html?_r=1

-Neal Bansal

Report of MIT Task Force on the Undergraduate Educational Commons

Hey,
Since Caltech is similar to MIT in so many respects, I thought that it
might be helpful to look over the report of MIT's Task Force on the
Undergraduate Educational Commons (which proposed changes to MIT's core
curriculum) as we reassess our own Core. Here it is:
http://web.mit.edu/committees/edcommons/documents/task_force_report.html

-Neal Bansal

Post to Blog

Hi,
I thought that the following site might be of interest:
http://www.princeton.edu/integratedscience/.
Princeton University recently established an optional Integrated Science
program for any undergraduate considering a major in the sciences or
engineering. It is an interdisciplinary introductory science curriculum
taken during the freshman and sophomore years, and I was reminded of
Professor Murray's suggestion (echoed by many others) to integrate our
core subjects in a cross-disciplinary manner. The Princeton curriculum
sounds like a good experiment, but I would like to find out more about it
before I form an opinion. I am very interested in the idea of giving our
core curriculum more continuity and relating individual subjects to each
other, but at the same time, I believe that each subject should be taught
rigorously at a fundamental level without the constant need to find
applications. Just thought that I'd put it up for others to think about.

-Neal Bansal

Improving teaching

From the previous unknown poster (again, if you post via email please sign your name or it all looks like it is coming from me!):
Improving teaching quality and faculty advising is not in the charge of our committee, but we are all interested in it.


Improving teaching quality and faculty advising is high on the list of things we are charged with! Spending all of this time worry about exact what should be in the core without worrying about how to make sure it (and everything else) is taught well would be a colossal waste of everyone's time, I think.

-Mike B

Some resources for improving teaching quality and faculty advising

Improving teaching quality and faculty advising is not in the charge
of our committee, but we are all interested in it. It is a major
emphasis of the Caltech Council on Undergraduate Education (CUE):
http://cue.caltech.edu/ , and Melany Hunt has been bringing in
visitors and speakers.

Last spring she brought in Dr. Rohan Abeyaratne, Head, Department of
Mechanical Engineering, MIT, who gave a nice talk (you can find it
here: http://www.mechse.uiuc.edu/media/pdfs/about/seminars/schaller_fa2007.pdf
).

In his talk, Prof Abeyaratne highlighted the work of Carl Weiman and Eric Mazur.

Eric Mazur's Science Education website is here:
http://mazur-www.harvard.edu/education/educationmenu.php

Here's Carl Weiman's very influential article, "Why Not Try a
Scientific Approach to Education?"
http://www.cwsei.ubc.ca/resources/files/Wieman-Change_Sept-Oct_2007.pdf

Here's Carl Weiman's very interesting blog:
http://www.scientificblogging.com/cwieman

And his Physics Education technology web site
http://phet.colorado.edu/index.php

Mike Brown has met with folks from the Stanford Center for Teaching
and Learning:
ctl.stanford.edu .

Finally, if you really want to know what a university education is
worth, down the line, Prof Abeyaratne suggests you learn from Father
Sarducci: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kO8x8eoU3L4