to remember for next time.

Students have been reading papers on equity in STEM and developing a research brief based on that so that others can have a quick reference on the "how and why" of addressing equity. They are also presenting this brief this week and I didn't want the 5 minute mumble followed by a few questions. (Actually they haven't been mumbling - so far they're really excited by their readings....)  So each has to present their brief, but then use a discussion technique to generate conversation. I gave them the following list to choose from, was worried it would be hokey/forced. It's been going so well.

What is one thing that you will remember from this brief? What was the most surprising idea in this brief?  What was the most useful idea?  Would you agree or disagree with this: ______? (writer of brief can fill in the blank) Why?

art: draw a representation of the ideas from this brief or answers to above question(s), share and discuss your representation with your group

one minute paper/silent science: write your answer to one (or more/all) of the above questions; then share for feedback, pass again for feedback (2 rounds)

agree/disagree spectrum: everyone jot down one or two statements related on the brief
I’ll collect and read. Form a group near the sign that represents your opinion (agree/disagree/neutral) find a partner in your group and discuss the reasons for choosing the group. Then find a partner in the opposite group and discuss the topic with someone who has a different opinion.

sticky note storm - choose one of the questions above; everyone write their ideas on sticky notes. these then are clustered/grouped/discussed

think pair share: think about the questions, discuss in pairs. then … share with class.

60‐60, 30‐30 find a partner. decide who is number one  and who is number two. Number one must talk about the topic for 60 seconds without stopping. No questions can be asked during this time. Then student number two must talk about the topic for 60  seconds without (!) repeating the ideas discussed by number one. Again no questions are asked. Then student number one responds or adds to the discussion for 30 seconds. Then student number two  does the same. report out briefly to class.

The belling of the cat

I have spent all week with this story in my mind. I wrote a facebook post - noting that, for so many of us, we are watching Dr. Blasey bell a cat that we could not. Then I took it down because it felt too public (this site is more public but has many fewer viewers).

I want to write the next chapter of Aesop's fable, where the sacrificial mouse steps forward and bravely bells the cat. And the cat turns around [claws out] and says, "What the hell are you doing? I'm not a cat! [hiss] What goes around comes around, mousey. I'm not going anywhere!!!" And half the mice fall all over themselves to say "Oh of course you're not a cat! This is insane!"

Oxygen has energy

I have a paper under review that talks about why biologists/nutrition labels locate energy in food and not oxygen (and why that makes physicists angsty). And I note that for biological systems, oxygen is widely available - food is the scarce resource. So in a framework where you are concerned with competition for scarce resources, it makes sense to locate energy in food.

Then last night I read the following story about a running shoe that shaves 4% off of running times:

"Embedded in the length of the midsole is a thin, stiff carbon-fiber plate that is scooped like a spoon... The plate is designed to reduce the amount of oxygen needed to run at a fast pace. It stores and releases energy with each stride and is meant to act as a kind of slingshot, or catapult, to propel runners forward."

For athletes, who can carbo-load, it's not food that is the limiting factor in performance, it's the VO2-max - how much oxygen they can take in and get to the cells that need it. And so - here, in an article on running - we see them talk about energy as linked to oxygen. It's not as explicit as "food has calories." - they don't directly say "the energy stored in the shoe means you don't need to bring in energy from oxygen...." but it's as close as I've seen.

😊

Also, I immediately wanted to energy theater that shoe, and compare it to an energy theater of a normal shoe.

Plans

This isn't so much a research post as an accountability post.

These were my writing goals for spring and summer. I was really excited. And ambitious:

March (2 weeks)	Inhaling Calories to Sci&E		PERC abstract
April	Chemical Bonds -JChemEd Potential Wells - TPT		white paper to ASSERT
May (open)	Truth/Success/Faith - Sci Ed begin EDISIn	postdoc grant begin	prospectus w/ Kim
June (2 weeks)	EDISIn - drafts to colleagues equity - begin	prep for advisory board	PERC submission
July	EDISIn - submit equity - draft to DH		** Leslie & Kim write **
August	hackable labs	postdoc grant submit	course prep, VIP prep

I pretty much accomplished March. I did accomplish many other (non-writing) goals - class prep, summer workshops, life goals, two conferences, prep for a third.  And I bought a couch which took more time than I care to admit.

This week Richard and Kate are in Minnesota, I have several big things to get moving and I'm paralyzed and going after low-hanging fruit (which also needs to be attended to) -- but I'm leaving partners waiting on me and I'm feeling pretty incapable. So I'm detailing plans here.

This week: For this week, my goals are to meet my deadlines with the RT paper (sorry, Amy, for not being a very good partner), and to submit the TPT paper on my students' work with the Gaussian Gun.

Next week: Annual report (MTW). Then off to NC!

While traveling: finalize course prep and perc poster

This fall: !everything else!

Can girls play, too?

Kate and I went to an event at the Student Union on Sunday. We entered through the “game room” area - billiards, bowling alley, darts, air hockey, foosball, video games, and sports on tv.

Me: I don’t think you’ve been in this building before! - This is a place where students can come to play games at college! (Subtext: Look how fun school is! Look how cool my workplace is! Bowling alley and tvs!)

Kate: Can girls play, too?

(YIKES! I look around — there are two male students playing video games with male characters. There is a guy playing pool, and another guy who is bowling. There are at least 8 tvs, and each one is playing an action movie or sporting event that is all male.)

Me: That’s a great question. It doesn’t look like it, does it? Would you want to play here?

Kate: (Looking at the bank of tv's) I don’t like scary movies.


I know this isn't news, but it is so crazy to me to watch Kate determine where she does and doesn't belong.  In the past week she has also asked if girls can play baseball and if girls can be weathermen.

She then learned that weathermen don't get to choose the weather, so that became less appealing an option.

Better.

This past Thursday the magic got going - the physics group and the chemistry group, who have each independently been working on their (very related) representations, realized the representations weren't the same but were unable to explain why. It was a fascinating and lively conversation.

Challenges

This semester I'm back to teaching an inquiry course - one where I know what we're going to investigate but I'm not sure where it will lead, where different groups pursue different - but related - problems, and where most of my work involves, I think, listening closely to student ideas and building on those as we craft our claims and questions and investigations. This semester I'm studying the course through the lens of "design" and "making" -- wondering what kinds of artifacts are produced and why, what constraints we meet and have to negotiate with our designs, etc.

I decided we'd investigate the Gaussian Gun, as a topic that cuts across many (but not all) sciences and has, I think, a low floor and high ceiling. I was anticipating an energy-theater investigation that might lead to a "5 Laws of Energy" kind of conversation, but that didn't happen.

And where we are is...

- one group has been working for a while now on making an potential well that mirrors the magnet ball. two prototypes built. one just proof-of-concept, one done by measuring forces and generating a well from that - trying to add a see-saw to transfer energy but that failed, now working on a final version.

- one group has compared the system to an SN AR reaction in chemistry (the intermediate state is stable, just not with the amount of energy this system has) and is generating a reaction map, again using a force probe

- one group was convinced the outgoing ball was faster than the incoming ball. They've 3-d printed a surface and are listening to the sound generated as it rolls over to deduce the speed.


I'm relieved we have something to show for ourselves. It's always really scary for me to teach this way with a new topic and worry we'll never get anywhere interesting.

But it's not really feeling too great. In the past, I feel like students have been really proud of their own work, engaged deeply in the debates and the work, and feel inspired and transformed by the class. I don't think anyone feels that way right now.

In addition, today one person was absent - his group member was really blasé and when I suggested that a group that has recently finished with their data join her to help take data and understand the work she is doing she said something like, "I have no idea what we're doing." Boo. As I walked them through the steps of what I thought they had been doing, it felt like I was giving mindless instructions.

With the 3-d-energy-well group, they're considering the really challenging problem of the asymmetry of the well (how can one side have a different slope and still reach the same height?), but the conversation - which was fun - was essentially me and one other student going back and forth. :(

It just mostly feels still a bit like pulling teeth or dragging feet. Students having to retake data because they weren't really thinking things through - other students watching while one tinkers and thinks and plans. Just kind of blah. It's not fun for me to teach. So while I think I can (for my grant) answer some questions about how various designed products emerged in the context of our inquiry, I'm not feeling like I have anything powerful to say about teaching and learning b/c we're just not enjoying it much.

Idaho Science Standards

Is there anything closer to a Nicene Creed for the modern state than state educational standards? A set of "we believe..." statements that a council agrees on? That separates full members of society (high school graduates) from those who are probationary (students) or shunned (dropouts)?

And the fact that we can't agree (Idaho is punting by making all "supporting content" from our version of NGSS not part of the standards) is just one more way in which we - the left and right - can't live together as one country.

I've gone to 3 days of hearings/voting on these standards; it's fascinating and bizarre.