The instructor for this course in Spring 2011 is Prof. Alex Hartemink. The two senior graduate teaching assistants are Nathan Sheffield from CBB and Xin Guo from CS.
The course consists of two major components: executing and presenting a research project in the field as part of a two-person team, and careful reading and discussion of recent primary literature in the field.
Research Project
Each student will work in a two-person team to undertake a research project over the course of the semester. Students should select a partner of their choosing. The best partner is one with whom you can work effectively and diligently. It can sometimes benefit a team to have partners with different backgrounds and expertise, but the opposite is also true, so there is no formal requirement in either direction. Please make use of the provided Google Document to help identify a partner. Teams must be established within one week.
Topic: The project topic should be chosen to be of potential interest in the field. At the same time, it should be of a scope that preliminary results can be obtained within 1-2 months. Having preliminary results early allows time for refinement of methods, further analysis, deeper investigation, and effective writing and communication of ideas.
Consultations: Each team will have three formal "consultations" over the course of the semester. Consultation 1 will be about establishing a good problem definition and scope. It will be with Alex and will take place the weeks of 31 January and 7 February. Consultation 2 will be about getting results and proper execution of the analysis. It will be with Xin and will take place the weeks of 21 February and 28 February. Consultation 3 will be about effective scientific writing. It will be with Nathan and will take place the weeks of 21 March and 28 March.
Teams are expected to set and drive the agenda at the consultations, so please come prepared to make best use of the time. Teams will also be expected to submit a written document regarding progress to date, at least 24 hours before their consultation.
Deliverables: In addition to the aforementioned written progress reports, the last three class sessions of the semester (12, 14, and 19 April) will be devoted to research presentations by the teams. Presentations should be around 20 minutes, and each partner is expected to present in roughly equal measure. A research paper—written in the style of a scientific paper and carefully edited—will be due on Friday 22 April, and represents the final requirement of the course.
Reading Papers
Each class session we will discuss a paper from the primary literature. Most of these papers will be extremely recent, so the course is quite different each time it is taught, but each time, it attempts to give students a clear sense of the cutting edge of the field.
For each paper, one student will be designated "leader", four to five more students will be designated "close readers", and the remainder of the class are "readers".
Roles and responsibilities:
- Leader: The Leader will read the paper the first time significantly in advance of the class (say, at least one week); will chase down other papers and do whatever background reading is necessary to develop a strong understanding of the paper; and will be prepared to lead an effective discussion with the class (factoring in questions and comments received from the close readers, where useful). Effective discussion arises from the right blend of explaining, listening, and most importantly, thoughtful question-asking (see more below). Each student will serve as Leader once during the semester.
- Close Reader: Close Readers will read the paper at least 48 hours in advance of the class, and will send a short email to the instructor and Leader 24-48 hours before class. This email should contain a few questions, comments, ideas, or confusions that arose from a close reading of the paper. These should be thoughtfully written, but need not be more than a paragraph or two. Try to include some big picture questions that will stimulate a good discussion, and not exclusively small details (though it's OK to include those as well since it can help Alex develop the right background material to discuss). Each student will serve as a close reader five times during the semester.
- Reader: It is expected that all students will read each paper before class, even when one is not the leader or a close reader; contributing to and benefiting from discussion depends upon advance reading. To further motivate advance reading, the instructor will often "cold call" students to explain some aspect of the paper.
Preparing to lead a discussion:
- As mentioned above, be sure to allow sufficient time to understand the paper and its context. The steps that follow cannot be done well without that.
- Read this general introduction on leading an effective discussion of a journal article. It isn't tailored exactly to our class setting, but it lays out some general principles as a starting point for the remaining steps.
- Try to identify as many thought provoking questions as you can, especially open-ended interpretative ones that will engender discussion. These should not be focused on background understanding: the hope is that between student initiative to understand the papers, and the cumulative effect of Alex's introductions over the course of the semester, the class will have sufficient background to be ready to engage in a good discussion. Rather, try to think of questions that allow the class to both 1) appreciate the most important and interesting content of the paper, and 2) reflect on how to extend, refine, improve, or build upon the ideas of the paper. You can use the questions of the close readers as inspiration, but don't feel obliged to cover everything they suggest. Consider them as generally representative of what the class might find most productive, but use your own judgment as to how to stimulate the best possible discussion.
- Split your questions into those two categories: questions that allow the class to appreciate the most important and interesting content of the paper, versus questions that allow the class to reflect on how to extend, refine, improve, or build upon the ideas of the paper. In each category, order the questions not in terms of where they appeared in the paper, but rather from most interesting/important to least interesting/important. A good discussion can sometimes lead in directions you haven't anticipated, and when those directions are productive, you may not get to all your questions, so you want to be sure that the ones you don't get to are the least interesting/important.
- Prepare a handout with your questions to distribute at the start of class. Having a handout allows you to phrase each question precisely, allows you to include figures from another sources if that is relevant, allows students to begin pondering questions before you ask them, and allows everyone to leave with something tangible so that they can follow up on questions that we did not have a chance to discuss during class.
- On the day of the discussion, try to get more than one response to your questions, but also judge when to move on: decide whether the class is better served lingering on a question or proceeding to the next. Also, it should be noted that sometimes the topic of one of your questions is covered by Alex during the introduction, and in such a case, it's sensible to just skip that question and move ahead to another of your choosing. Be inclusive of people that have not yet spoken up and invite them to offer their perspective. After an answer, inquire if others in the class have a different perspective. Secret: You actually have to do very little talking if you are well prepared with good questions. Have fun!