return to Ann McNeal's homepage
In "Drugs in the Nervous System," we aim to get students thinking critically and creatively about science by using their curiosity about a hot topic. The course is an introductory, interdisciplinary overview of the effect of drugs on the body, their interactions in the nervous system, effects on behavior, and potential health effects. We want students to come away with experience of the fallibility of science, as well as its power. It helps this subversive purpose of ours that the actual scientific results in the fields covered in this course are a goldmine of controversy and ambiguity.
Essentially, our challenge to the students is to become "scientists for a term," to become proficient enough at analyzing ideas and evidence so that they can ask and answer their own questions in this field. In the last part of the term, each of them will spend a month doing research in the primary literature on a specific question about a drug, reporting back orally and in writing on their findings.
Since its opening in 1970, Hampshire College has prided itself on its innovative science teaching, developing a unique system in which all students (as their science requirement) must carry out research projects. Each student must pose an individual question, researching it in the library or in the lab, and presenting a paper with the question, the evidence and the results. This paper is then revised under faculty supervision until it is satisfactory. Overall, the aim of the Hampshire requirement can be stated as getting the student to "think like a scientist."--in other words, not only to understand but to use the "mode of inquiry" of science. In order to do a true piece of research, students must use primary scientific papers or laboratory work. Thus they get the "feel" of science in a way that no secondary sources can provide.
It is absolutely central to the task that students ask their own questions; without this, literally nothing happens. Therefore, the projects are student-initiated. The importance of asking one's own questions is severalfold: 1) to come to the point of being able to ask a question that is scientifically potentially answerable, bounded and appropriate takes a certain amount of sophistication (which is the aim of our courses) 2) by posing the question, as others have noted the student both reaches a new cognitive level and becomes involved in a different relation to the work, 3) it is tremendously motivational for the student.
This project-based, student centered approach differs radically from traditional science teaching in that the task is not only self-chosen but also is in some sense a real-life task. Students ask questions whose answers matter to them, such as: "Does alcoholism run in families?" "Does marijuana impair memory?" "Are the brains of schizophrenics different from other people's brains?" "is tobacco truly addictive?" Likewise, we evaluate students on their performance on these tasks rather than on tests and quizzes. We do this because our measure of quality is the degree to which the student can ask scientifically valid questions, research them, evaluate the evidence. and present the work in a well-structured essay.
Despite our emphasis on skills, we do not use a model of breaking down the learning into minimal fragments; rather, each assignment is designed to be holistic where possible. For example, for the first written paper students use secondary sources to research any drug they choose. This acquaints them superficially with the library resources, gives them practice in choosing a topic, and has them learn and use a limited new vocabulary. Later, a group oral report on a primary paper requires them to use bibliographic resources to find the paper, cooperate to understand it, and use their vocabulary orally, all in the service of conveying the meaning of the paper.
The culmination of the course is in the individual projects on which student spend the last four weeks. They are given wide latitude to choose their own research projects, which are very often interesting and educational for the faculty as well as the class as a whole. We have had projects on such diverse topics as the use of synthetic cannabinoids for cancer patients, the use of Ritalin for Attention Deficit Disorder, and the effects of fetal exposure to heroin and cocaine. Often students find primary papers that we later use for the whole class when we teach the course again.
Although they may choose any relevant topic on which there is sufficient research, students are required to deliver the goods in their final paper within clear parameters. They must work from both primary and secondary sources; we check this at the stage when they hand in a bibliography. They must frame a clear question, give background to set it in context, and analyze at least three primary research papers relevant to the question. Finally they must compare the papers and come to a conclusion. It is important to note (and students often are anxious about this) that they do not need to come to a firm conclusion if the data are equivocal. A clear statement of the ambiguities in a research area can be a powerful and sophisticated conclusion!
In our particular course, although students begin with a range of attitudes, it is fair to say that a good number of them are both "anti- science" and "pro-drug." They are pro-drug in the sense that they are jaded by numerous campaigns telling them that all drugs are evil. They have been told they should "Just say no," while they see around them the constant use of alcohol, caffeine and tobacco. They wonder whether any of the warnings should be taken seriously. They are "anti-science" in the sense of believing that science is distant and all-powerful but strangely irrelevant to themselves as individuals. Many believe they are "dumb" in science.
During the time spent in the course, we are able to see distinct changes in the way students approach science. Besides becoming much more comfortable with scientific language and concepts, they become more critical and discerning. For example, students were clearly impressed with the potential for the drug "ecstacy" to cause nerve cell death after they heard the evidence from a student who had researched the literature. Students often feel empowered in the sense of having more confidence in their abilities in science and being able to do research on a topic. They start to get in the habit of asking,"What's the evidence?"
return to Ann McNeal's homepage
return
to Natural Science homepage