University of Massachusetts at Boston

Critical and Creative Thinking graduate program, Science in a Changing World track

College of Advancing & Professional Studies

Biology in Society: Critical Thinking

CrCrTh 645/ Bio 545

Syllabus, Spring 2019

I. Quick access to key information and links to bookmark on your browser

Information to get started

Contract

Schedule of classes

Bibliography

POST-IT the start of each component in your printed version of this syllabus

Instructors	Peter Taylor, Science in a Changing World graduate track Morgan Thompson
Emails:	peter.taylor@umb.edu mnthomps@post.harvard.edu
Phones	PT: 617-287-7636 (but email gets a speedier response) MT: (by email only)
Office/Classroom	Wheatley 4th floor, room 170 (on right near end of main long corridor)
Office hours (also phone& zoom):	PT: www.faculty.umb.edu/peter_taylor/PTOfficeHours.html (Tu, W 2.40-3.40 & W 7-8) MT: https://crcrth645.wordpress.com/office-hours-with-morgan-thompson/ (W 2-3:20; Th 4-5)
Class time & location	Weds 4-6.45pm, W-4-170 (Online students join all course sessions by zoom on http://bit.ly/645zoom)
Report glitches in online materials	using this form
BOOKMARK THIS! Syllabus	syllabus, www.faculty.umb.edu/peter_taylor/645/syllabus.html
BOOKMARK THIS! Blog	crcrth645.wordpress.com for submitting work; peer reviewing & other comments related to the course; links to password-protected readings and recordings
Bookmarked URLs	groups.diigo.com/group/biology-in-society shows relevant URLs bookmarked by instructors and (optionally) students who join this diigo group

II. Information to get started, orient yourself, and refer back to from time to time

CATALOG DESCRIPTION
Current and historical cases are used to examine the political, ethical, and other social dimensions of the life sciences. Close examination of developments in the life sciences can lead to questions about the social influences shaping scientists' work or its application. This, in turn, can lead to new questions and alternative approaches for educators, biologists, health professionals, and concerned citizens.

OVERVIEW
Critical thinking about the diverse influences shaping the life sciences. Topics include evolution and natural selection; heredity, development and genetic determinism; biotechnology and reproductive interventions. We interpret episodes in science, past and present, in light of scientists' historical location, economic and political interests, use of language, and ideas about causality and responsibility.

You address the course material on a number of levels:

as an opportunity to learn the science and approaches to interpreting science;
as models for working as an educator--construed broadly as stimulating greater citizen involvement in scientific debates; and
as a basis for discussions about practices and philosophies of education and lifelong, collaborative learning.

You undertake individual semester-long "learning/engaging" project in an area of the life sciences in their social context about which you are interested in engaging others in learning and critical thinking. Each week you adopt or adapt the themes and activities from the previous session to apply to your project area. This provides many tools and perspectives on self-directed research (and thus serves as a research seminar for honors students).

Each session has 3 parts:

during the last part of the previous meeting

Readings and exercises follow up on the mini-lecture and prepare you for the next meeting. (Students who miss a session can listen to the recordings of the mini-lecture and class meeting, undertake the activities, and, well before the next meeting, post on the blog their reflections related to four separate points spread across the class meeting.)

Each session is followed up in 3 ways:

a) additional readings (optional);
b) adopt or adapt the themes and activities to apply to your project area; and
c) contribute to the revision of a text (Taylor 2019) and to an annotated collection of new readings and other resources. Students who give permission will have their contributions to the revisions of the text acknowledged.

Individually and as a group, you already know a lot about learning, teaching, biology, society, and critical thinking. If this knowledge is elicited and affirmed, you are more able to learn from others. Many activities can help the course develop as a learning community, such as, weekly check-in on how you adopted/adapted themes, contributions on the chapters, peer commenting, miscellaneous reflections using the blog, and pair-wise or small-group work in class sessions. Over the course of the semester, you are encouraged to develop trust that there is insight in every response and share your not-yet-stable aspects.

Through activities, such as the Critical Incident Questionnaire, students are encouraged to approach this course as a work-in-progress. Instead of harboring criticisms to submit after the fact, we can find opportunities to affirm what is working well and suggest directions for further development.

TEXTS
Readings available for download from link on blog (accessible to students only).

Recommended to help with writing, research, and group processes:

Daniel, D., C. Fauske, P. Galeno and D. Mael (2001). Take Charge of Your Writing: Discovering Writing Through Self-Assessment. Boston: Houghton Mifflin ("new" copies available well below list price on amazon.com)
Elbow, P. (1981). Writing with Power. New York: Oxford Univ. Press. (old editions are OK)
Taylor, P., J. Szteiter (2012) Taking Yourself Seriously: Processes of Research and Engagement. Arlington, MA: The Pumping Station. (Available in hard copy or pdf from http://bit.ly/bookstps )
Online links may duplicate pages in this text, but, if you buy the printed or pdf text, you can refer to that instead of reading the pages online and you have a reference work to consult after the course.
Taylor, P. (2019) The Social Construction of Life: Critical Thinking about Biology and Society. Work in progress. Retrieved from http://www.faculty.umb.edu/peter_taylor/645/ChaptersSynthesized.html

PREREQUISITES and preparation assumed for this course
Graduate standing or permission of instructor. In lieu of other formal prerequisites, your previous studies should have prepared you to

a. examine influences shaping the life sciences and their applications in society;
b. engage others (e.g., students) in learning and critical thinking;
c. formulate and pursue library research and internet exploration and d. write, seek feedback, and revise in systematic and efficient ways with minimal supervision (see research and study competencies).

TECHNICAL SET UP

Make bookmarks on your browser to quick access links (see sect. I of syllabus); Set up access to online bibliographic databases via the library; Arrange bibliographic software for references; Accept the invite to join the blog; Organize your computer (e.g., separate folders/directories for course work, downloaded readings, etc., replicate this file organization on a flash drive or other backup medium, and have a system for synchronizing and backing up files--see research competencies for more detail and other suggestions.) Face2face students: Bring laptop if you have one, registered for eduroam or UMB wifi, to sessions 0, 1, 2, 7, 13.

For students from a distance: Do a test run of joining the zoom site; Establish high bandwidth internet access (e.g., ethernet cable into modem); Procure and use reliable headset; Practice muting when not speaking and screensharing of document.

WRITING SUPPORT: For graduate students, see http://www.cct.umb.edu/writingsupport.html.

ACCOMMODATIONS: Sections 504 and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 offer guidelines for curriculum modifications and adaptations for students with documented disabilities. The student must present any adaptation recommendations to the professors within a reasonable period, preferably by the end of the Drop/Add period.

CODE OF CONDUCT: The University's Student Code of Conduct exists to maintain and protect an environment conducive to learning. It sets clear standards of respect for members of the University community and their property, as well as laying out the procedures for addressing unacceptable conduct. Students can expect faculty members and the Office of the Dean of Students to look after the welfare of the University community and, at the same time, to take an educational approach in which students violating the Code might learn from their mistakes and understand how their behavior affects others.

Students are advised to retain a copy of this syllabus in personal files for use when applying for certification, licensure, or transfer credit.

This syllabus is subject to change, but workload expectations will not be increased after the semester starts. (Version 20 February '19)

III. Contract: Course requirements and assessment

The course revolves around weekly written assignments as well as participation items, which include active participation during class based on preparation between classes, peer commentary on draft installments, and more. The overall qualities desired of you as a learner are captured in the Rubric below. The basic description of what is expected on assignments is given below; additional guidance on how to think about a specific assignment can be drawn from the material in the Chapters.
It is expected that you will spend at least 6.5 hours per session outside class time reading, researching, and writing. You should view each assignment and each session in relation to the unfolding of learning during the course. (That is, do not expect the syllabus and online links to allow you to cut to the chase about what to do at the last minute for the next class.) The course works by building from topic to the next so not being prepared or late submissions detract significantly from the learning possible in class sessions.
Use an assignment checklist (copied from Checklist) to keep track of due dates and throughout the semester record assignments and participation items submitted/fulfilled. Do not expect emails, class-time or meetings with the instructors to be taken up reminding you. (See policy for requesting an Incomplete.)
You can ask for extensions on two assignments or participation items, moving the due date as far back as the last session. Also, to accommodate the contingencies of your lives, 20% of the assignments and participation items can be skipped altogether without penalty. (No explanation is needed for extensions or skipped work. Simply record these on your assignment checklist and keep up with other assignments and participation items.)
The written assignments are commented on, but not graded. Not grading keeps the focus on Dialogue around written work, which provides guidance on Revision and Resubmission tailored to each student's specific interests and needs. You are expected to read comments carefully, consult with the peer commenter or instructors if you don't understand a comment they made, revise thoughtfully in response to the comments, and resubmit until you receive an OK/RNR (=OK, revision and resubmission not requested).
You should aim for OK/RNR on at least 9 of the 12 written assignments as well as fulfilling 32 of 40 participation items. If you reach this target—and the goal is to work with everyone to achieve that—you get at least a B+ and a rubric is used to determine B+, A- or A. The instructors get the final say on assessment using the rubric, but students are asked to supply their own self-assessment. If you do not reach the automatic B+ level, 5.5 points are given for each OK/RNR assignment, 3 points are given for other drafts submitted on time, and .75 points for each participation item, up to a maximum of 80. (See Rationale for the Assessment system.)
Overall points are converted to letter grades as follows: The minimum grade for A is 95 points, for A- is 90, for B+ is 80, for B is 72.5; for B- is 65; for C+ is 57.5; and for C is 50 points.
For CCT graduate students only: The process review or the final report should be suitable for inclusion in the required Reflective Practitioner's Portfolio because the project is on a topic that has evolved during the course of the semester as you integrate the perspectives from each session and look ahead to future research and engagement on a topic that involves science and its relation to social context.

A. Written assignments (2/3 of grade)
A semester-long "learning/engaging" project allows you to adopt or adapt the critical thinking themes and activities from each session into an area of your choice provided that it connects the life sciences to their social context. The area should be one about which you are interested in engaging others in learning and critical thinking. Engagement might range from teaching, to activism, to personal/professional development. It also means you are engaged—the area should also be one you want to learn more about. A sequence of 12 assignments is required: initial description (draft due session 3); installments (350-600 words) in which you adopt or adapt the themes and activities from sessions 3-10 (initial drafts due sessions 4-11); presentation (in session 12); complete draft report (due session 12); and final (1500-2500 words) report (due one week after session 13).

Each submission should have this sequence: Title, Your name, Date, Session the installment relates to, "DRAFT," "REVISION", or "REVISION2," a 1-3 sentence summary, the text (with in-text author-date citations for every reference used, including webpages), and bibliography of references in full (at the end, alphabetized by last name of author, including webpages). Save as pdf then make a blog post with that title, the summary and a link to the pdf. Specify the category—with the prefix i—for the session the installment relates to. When you post a revision (including an updated date): use the same post, insert the revision above the draft or previous revision and separated by a "More" tag; and change the date to the present time so the post moves to the top of the stream of posts.

The pdf's may be on your personal google drive or other space in the cloud (which allows you to delete them after the semester is over).
Drafts can be made password-protected if you want only the instructors and (by arrangement) a peer reviewer to see them.

Initial description: Building on what you arrive at after the in-class workshop of session 2 and comments from the instructors, compose a paragraph (or two) that conveys

you

Installments, in which you adopt or adapt the critical thinking themes and activities from each session 3-10 (350-600 words; drafts due sessions 4-11; revisions due a week after comments from the instructors are posted):

Examples of past students' installments are linked to the Readings (accessible via link on the blog [at the top right]), but each project and student is different. It is primarily through comments on your draft submissions that you see how to make the process expand your thinking about the specific project you choose (see Dialogue around written work). Recommended steps—Write down for yourself the critical thinking themes of the session (as emerge from the preparatory reading(s), the class activity, and any additional reading you do). Think about an aspect or extension of your project for which the critical thinking themes would be relevant. Expect to have to undertake some further reading and research into articles available online through the UMB library.
- E.g., To adapt PBL (project-based learning) to your area, suppose your audience were other teachers involved in a program to heighten students' awareness of addiction in the brain. You might imagine a retreat where you had 90 minutes to get the teachers aware of the wider social context around efforts to emphasize the effects on the brain. You would design a rapid PBL that opened up exploration of changing economic considerations as they have led to growing abuse of prescription medicine, successes and failures of efforts in other areas to alter behaviors, new addictions after baryatric surgery, etc. In short, your installment would be the PBL and accompanying explanation of how you would run the PBL.
- E.g., To use theme (of session 3) about interpreting ideas of nature as ideas about favored social order, suppose your project were about conservation biology (a.k.a. protecting biodiversity). You might search for writing that speaks of how loss of biodiversity threatens the "balance of nature." What kind of balance is that (fragile? long-standing?...) and what does this balance say about how industries should be organized and regulated? In your search you may come across writing about biophilia, about people's need to spend time in undisturbed wilderness, and so on. You might then look for analogies with the Romanticism of 200 years ago when people wrote of similar needs at exactly the same time as humans were, through industries and mining, ramping up their interventions in non-human nature (and in relations among humans). After some exploration, you might start to see how for your intended audience you could foster learning and critical thinking using the theme that ideas of nature as ideas tell us about the writer's/artist's favored social order.

Presentation, 10 minutes (to be confirmed) for presentation and discussion. Quickly set the scene -- reminding listeners of your area of biology in society and the audience that you are trying to engage in critical thinking and learning -- then convey the way your thinking evolved over the semester, including any stumbling blocks, and, in order to prime discussion and feedback, express where you need to develop your thinking further about how to engage your audience in critical thinking and learning.

Report: A synthesis of the installments highlighting the exercises, activities, themes you use to engage your audience in critical thinking and learning, but note:

Some of the themes and activities from the sessions may seem more important than others when it comes to adapting or adopting them into the area in which you are interested in engaging others in learning and critical thinking. So spread out printouts of your installments and take a fresh look at them as a set. Feel free to rearrange and highlight selected installments if that helps your overall approach to engaging others in learning and critical thinking come across most forcefully.
Even if you got an OK/RNR for an installment, there may still be more thinking you can do in response from comments from me. Take a fresh look at my comments and feel encouraged to revise before inserting any installment into the report.
Preparing your session 12 presentation and the feedback you get will help you to see how the installments fit together into a single report on "engaging others in learning and critical thinking" about the life sciences in their social context.
In addition to the audience of your instlamments (e.g., middle school science students), there is a second audience to address in the report, namely, your peers and other people interested in the life sciences and society and/or in fostering learning and critical thinking. For these people, your report can include text, which you might have included in the installments, that explains your choices about how to address your primary audience. Moreover, if your ideas about who to engage and how change over the course of the semester, feel free to include footnotes or a side narrative of the development of your thinking.
You should not think of either audience as the instructors. If you write as if the instructors are the reader you run the risk of assuming the readers can fill in where you leave gaps because they know the course and what you were working on.
For the report to be counted as final, you must have revised in response to comments from instructors and peers on a complete draft. (The draft must get to the end to count as complete, even if some sections along the way are only sketches.) Additional investigation and thinking may be entailed.sss
As for installments, use author-date in-text citations and include an alphabetized bibliography of all references cited.

Participation and contribution to the class process (1/3 of grade)

B. In order to get oriented to the various course materials and mechanics, complete the "syllabus quiz" and post as a comment on the syllabus quiz blog post.
C. Building learning community
C1. Prepared participation and attendance at class meetings (=13 items)

Prepared participation in class sessions is expected. One item fulfilled for each class you participate in (except not if you are unprepared). Participation includes being punctual, not taking cell phone calls, not checking email etc., and, for online students, arranging reliable internet connection and head set.
If you miss a session being prepared for the next one includes listening to the mini-lecture (available via the Recordings link on the blog [at the top right]) and adding a post to the blog about the interactive activity if there was one. To make up for a missed session, listen to the recordings of the activities of the missed session by the Saturday afterwards, undertake any activity that the in-class students were led through, and post to the blog your reflections related to four separate points spread across the class meeting (up to the mini-lecture for the next session).

C2. Contributions to the revision of the chapters [previously called "cases"] introduced in sessions 2-11 or to an annotated collection of new readings and other resources (due start of sessions 3-12; 6 times = 6 items)

Post these with the category "Contributions," or, even better, with the subcategory starting with "c" within Contributions for the appropriate session.
The hope is that the revised chapters and the bibliography will form part of a text to be published. Fashion your contributions so that the chapter works better from a student's point of view, is brought up to date, and includes precis of readings. (The instructors will let you know if you need to flesh out the contributions.) (See examples by the instructors.)

D. Weekly check-in on how you adopted/adapted themes (sessions 3-11) (=9 items)

In 1-2 minutes describe how you interwove the themes and activities of the previous session into your project (as you will have described in more detail in your written installment).

E. Office hours with the instructors on your project and other assignments, by sessions 6 and 10 (=2 items)

for discussion of comments on assignments (see Dialogue around written work), ideas for course project, and the course as a whole. They are important to ensure timely resolution of misunderstandings and to get a recharge if you get behind. Appointments missed without notifying instructors in advance count as a participation item not fulfilled.

F. Peer commentary on other students' installments, initial description & draft report (6 times = 6 items, due by session after posting, sessions 4-13)

To indicate that you will be commenting on a draft, insert your name in the comment box following the posted draft installment, then edit the box to add your comments within 5 days. (Don't comment on a draft if someone else already is, unless there are no others to comment on. Try to find a draft from someone you have not commented on before.)
When you decide what approaches to commenting you ask for as a writer or what approaches you use as a commentator, keep Elbow and Belanoff's (2000) variety of responses in mind. (Elbow 1981, chapters 3 and 13 on sharing and feedback is relevant here as well.) After all, although some commentors fill the margins with specific suggestions for clarification and changes, the response of students to the suggestions often goes no further than touching up—the desired re-thinking and revising of ideas and writing rarely happen. It seems a better use of an commentor's time to capture where the writer was taking you and make a few suggestions that might clarify and extend the impact on readers of what was written. As writers, we all value comments that show us that we have been listened to and our voice, however tentative, has been heard.

G. Assignment Checklist Filled-in during semester and submitted to instructors by email at time of final submissions (1 item).

H. Process review (posted to blog) -- Identify 4-6 examples that capture the process of development of your work and thinking about fostering “critical thinking about the diverse influences shaping the life sciences.” Journaling, freewriting, drafts, etc. may be included, that is, not simply your best products. Explain your choices in a 250-500 word cover note and through annotations for each item. (Examples of past students' process reviews will be linked to the Readings [accessed via the blog].)

I. Narrative course evaluation completed via www.cct.umb.edu/CourseEvaluations.html before time of final submissions.

Rubric

For each quality "fulfilled very well" you get * * OR * if you "did an OK job, but there was room for more development/attention." You get no stars for "to be honest, this still needs serious attention." Total of **s x 5/6 = extra points added to the 80 points for automatic B+ grade.

Quality	Self-assessment
1. A sequence of assignments keeping to the weekly due dates with timely revisions,
2. often revised thoroughly and with new thinking in response to comments.
3. Project innovative, well planned and carried out with considerable initiative, and
4. indicates that you will be able to engage others in learning and critical thinking on your topic.
5. Project report clear and well structured,
6. with supporting references and detail, and professionally presented.
7. Active, prepared participation for and learning from session activities.
Active contribution to building the class as learning community, evident in 8. contributions to the revision of the chapters and to the annotated reading and resource list, and
9. comments on presentations and peer review of drafts.
Weekly check-ins, installments, and process review, which show: 10. Consistent work outside sessions,
11. deep reflection on your development through the semester, and
12. map of the future directions in which you plan to develop.

IV. Schedule of classes: What is expected each session and why -- how each session contributes to the unfolding of the course

TOPICS AT A GLANCE

0 (1/30) Pre-course meeting to get set up
1 (2/6) Introductions to the course, the other participants, and project-based learning (PBL)
2 (2/13) Workshop to develop initial ideas of activities to engage others in critical thinking about the life sciences in their social context
3 (2/20) Interpreting ideas about nature as ideas about society
4 (2/27) Biological origin stories and their structure
5 (3/6) Multiple layers of a scientific theory: Reconstructing Darwin's presentation of natural selection
6 (3/20) What causes a disease? -- Beriberi (and field trip related to session 3)
7 (3/27) Metaphors of control and coordination in development
8 (4/3) What causes a disease? -- Pellagra (Styles of causal explanation & their relation to ideas about politics or social action)
9 (4/10) How changeable are IQ test scores?
10 (4/17) Social negotiations around genetic screening
11 (4/24) Intersecting processes -- Complexities of environment and development in the age of DNA
12 (5/1) Presentations on learning/engagement units and their development over the semester
13 (5/8) Taking Stock of Course: Where have we come and where do we go from here?
No class 5/15.

The mini-lecture introducing each session happens at the end of the previous class. Preparation for each class is detailed on the link given for each session. The following check-ins, assignments, and participation items are not listed in the schedule after the first time:

Preparation for class usually involves sections 1 and 2 of the Chapters. Try not to look at the other sections until after class; these will have some suggestions for how to approach installments.
Due on the day of the class posted on the blog is a 350-600 word draft installment in which you adopt/adapt the themes or activities of the previous session to apply to the area chosen for your "learning/engaging" project.
Each class from session 3-11 begins with a check-in where you say briefly how you did that adopting/adapting of the themes or activities of the previous session.
Follow-up on each session 2-11 includes contributions to revision of the chapters introduced in the sessions or to an annotated collection of new readings and other resources related to the chapters.
(Chart showing rhythm of assignments and related participation items.)

Session 0 Preview & Set Up

(1/30):
4pm Face2face honors students (optional for graduate students): Course description; Conception of research running through the course; Interview students from previous offering of course
5pm Online students only: Practice connecting with zoom and screensharing
5pm Face2face honors students (optional for graduate students): finding your way around the course materials via initial work on "syllabus quiz"
5.30pm Face2Face and online mutual support on finding your way around the course materials

Session 1 Introductions

Preparation: Reading: Taylor, "We know more..."

(Don't expect the significance of everything to be clear on the first reading. This article is also assigned at the end of the course, with the expectation that students will see a difference in their appreciation of the issues raised.)

Syllabus quiz, which includes: review the syllabus; rhythm of sessions; get set-up to use the internet and computers; etc.
Face2face students: Bring laptop to class if you have one; sign up for UMB wifi on it

Session (2/6):
a. Personal and professional development (PPD) goals (worksheet); Fellow students and their concerns
b. Rapid Project-based learning activity (worksheet)
Follow-up:Sign up for first conference, to help get on top of course materials and expectations, to discuss project ideas, etc.
Post PPD worksheet on the blog under Profile category (set as "private" if you wish)
Work due this session: Syllabus quiz

Session 2 Project-based learning (PBL) about biology in society

Mini-lecture (given 2/6): Project-based learning

Preparation: Read the PBL guided tour and two PBL cases based on an embryo mix up (details (see #1 & 2))
Bring laptop to class if you have one
Session (2/13):
a. Dialogue hour on PBL and comparison of the two cases.
b. Workshop to generate initial ideas for semester-long "learning/engaging" project (Session2Worksheet)
Follow-up: Contributions to revision of the chapter and PBL guidelines introduced in the session. Use blog post to make suggestions or to provide an annotation to a new reading or other resource.
Reading (optional): Greenwald, "Learning from problems"

Session 3. Interpreting ideas about nature as ideas about society, which involves exposing what is only implicit, what is not literally stated

Mini-lecture (given 2/13): Interpreting images of society and nature in the West since the middle ages (slide show)

Preparation: Reading: Williams, "Ideas of nature" (details (see #1 & 2))
Session (2/20):
Check-in: Description of your project and how you adopted/adapted themes from last class.
Review timelines of changing and contrasting ideas of nature.
Multi-party conversation among contrasting views about nature (Session3Worksheet)
Part 2: March 20, 3-5pm for facetoface students: "Scavenger hunt" in Harvard Museum of Natural History to identify features that are consistent or discordant with the theme of the session (Session3Worksheetb). (Online students identify a local natural history museum, zoo, or aquarium to visit.)
Follow-up: Contributions to revision of the chapter.
Reading (optional): Berger, "Why look at animals," Worster, chaps. 1 & 2.
Work due this session: Initial description of your semester-long "learning/engaging" project, including how you would adopt or adapt PBL into your area.
Comment posted on this link to make suggestions about last session's chapter or to provide an annotation to a new reading or other resource related to the chapter.

Session 4. Biological origin stories and their structure

Mini-lecture (given 2/20): The structure of Genesis, chapter 1

Preparation: Readings: Martin, "The egg and the sperm: How science has constructed a romance," Lewin, "The storytellers," Hrdy, "An Initial Inequality."
Examine biology texts for the gender bias claimed by Martin and others (details (see #1 & 2))
Session (2/27):
Pairwise discussion of Martin's interpretation and analysis of structure of Hrdy, followed by whole-class discussion
Follow-up: Contributions to revision of the chapter
Reading (optional): Landau, "Human Evolution as Narrative," Beldecos, et al. "The importance of feminist critique," Fausto-Sterling, "Society writes biology," "Life in XY Corral"
Work due this session: Installment of your semester-long "learning/engaging" project, adapting the themes and/or activities of the previous session.
Comment posted on appropriate post on the blog to make suggestions about last session's chapter or to provide an annotation to a new reading or other resource related to the chapter.
This work due is not repeated in the syllabus from this point on.

Session 5. How did Darwin try to convince people of Natural selection as the mechanism of evolution? (Multiple layers of a scientific theory--argument, analogy, metaphor, and defences)

Mini-lecture (given 2/27): Introduction to close reading of Darwin. Natural selection as a metaphor.

Preparation: Reading: Darwin, On the Origin of Species, Introduction & Chaps. 1, 3, part of 4, using Session5Worksheet (details (see #1 & 2))
Session (3/6): Close reading , using Session5Worksheet and reconstruction of Darwin's exposition of his theory of natural selection.
Follow-up: Contributions to revision of the chapter
Readings (optional): Moore, "Socializing Darwin," Orel, "Scientific animal breeding," Rudge, "Does being wrong," Taylor, "Natural Selection: A heavy hand."

Session 6. What causes a disease?--Beriberi

Mini-lecture (given 3/6): Introduction to the case and historical case-based learning

Preparation: This session involves completion of programmed, historical case-based learning that happens outside the class meeting. It is asynchronous and you can start any time. It will work best if you all try to complete it by Wednesday, 3/20. (case, with instructions at the start)
Session 3/20: Continuation of session 3 (above): Field Trip to a Natural History Museum, zoo, or aquarium, using worksheet to guide your exploration. For local students, visit 26 Oxford St., Cambridge. Bring student ID or MA license to get in free, arrive any time after 3pm. Meet outside Museum at 5pm to go to the Greenhouse Cafe for debriefing and (optional) dinner.
Follow-up: Contributions to revision of the chapter
Work due this session: First office hours conference must be completed before class 6 to discuss the course and course project. Schedule second meeting before class 10.

Session 7. Metaphors of control and coordination in development

Mini-lecture (given by 18-minute audio lecture): Metaphors in science and in interpretation of science & Multiple views of heredity c. 1900

Preparation: Reading: Gilbert, "Cellular Politics," "Animal development," Lakoff and Johnson, "Concepts We Live By" (on metaphors) (details (see #1 & 2))
Bring laptop to class if you have one
Session (3/27):
Game of Life and analogies with Development
Inventing alternative metaphors of control and co-ordination, incl. discussion of Just vs. Goldschmidt
Follow-up: Contributions to revision of the chapter
Goodwin, How the Leopard Changed its Spots, Oyama, "Boundaries," Sapp, "Struggle for Authority"

Session 8. What causes a disease?--the consequences of hereditarianism in the case of pellagra

Mini-lecture (given 3/27): Styles of causal explanation & their relation to ideas about politics/social action: Review of beriberi case & introduction to pellagra

Preparation: Reading: Chase, "False Correlations = Real Deaths" (details (see #1 & 2))
Session (4/3):
Take the roles of Goldberger and Davenport to convince others to act on your scientific account
Follow-up: Contributions to revision of the chapter
Reading (optional): Harkness, "Vivisectors and vivishooters" (human experimentation); Marks, "Epidemiologists explain"

Session 9. How changeable are IQ test scores?

Mini-lecture (given 4/3): Interpreting parent-offspring height patterns

Preparation: Lewontin-Jensen-Lewontin exchange on intelligence (details (see #1 & 2))
Session (4/10):
Map arguments, counter-arguments, and missing arguments in the exchange
Follow-up: Contributions to revision of the chapter
Reading (optional): American Psychological Association, "New model of IQ development"

Session 10. Social negotiations around genetic screening

Mini-lecture (given 4/10): PKU--Substituting a genetic condition for chronic illness and second-generation effects (& introduction to intersecting processes)

Preparation: Readings: Rapp, "Moral pioneers," Paul, "The history of newborn phenylketonuria screening" (details (see #1 & 2))
Session (4/17):
Design a forum to help supplement advances in genetic screening with communities developing a) greater tolerance for normal variation; b) social measures to care for people suffering from abnormal variation; and/or c) multiple voices/constituencies/ethical positions around gene-based medicine.
Follow-up: Contributions to revision of the chapters on PKU and on genetic screening
Reading (optional): Yoxen, 157-173
Work due this session: Second office hours meeting must be completed before class 10 to discuss evolving course projects.

Session 11. Intersecting processes -- Complexities of environment and development in the age of DNA

Mini-lecture (given 4/17): Intersecting processes in the social origins of mental illness

Preparation: Readings: Taylor, "What can we do," American Psychological Association, "New model of IQ development" (details (see #1 & 2))
Session (4/24):
Diagramming intersecting processes (to analyze change as something produced by intersecting economic, political, linguistic, and scientific processes operating at different scales)
Follow-up: Contributions to revision of the chapter
Reading (optional): Taylor, "Distributed agency," Underhill, "Life shaped," Freese et al., "Rebel without a cause," Pollitt, "When is a mother"

Session 12. Presentations on learning/engagement units and their development over the semester
Workshop (run on 4/24) on preparing report and presentation; preceded by a mini-lecture on how the themes of the course add up.

Preparation: Presentations on learning/engagement units and their development over the semester (for facetoface studewnts: email visual aids to instructors in advance). Length, incl. feedback time = 10 minutes (to be confirmed)

(Because you cannot possibly cover everything you did, begin by quickly setting the scene -- reminding listeners of your area of biology in society and the audience that you are trying to engage in critical thinking and learning -- then convey the way your thinking evolved over the semester, including any stumbling blocks. Finally, in order to prime discussion, express where you need to develop your thinking further. Visual aids should aid what you say, not repeat all your words.
Although students usually do work-in-progress presentations in my courses that help clarify the project definition and priorities, you have been clarifying with each installment, so these presentations are near the end.

Session (5/1):
10-minute Presentations on learning/engagement units and their development over the semester, with peer comments
Follow-up: Commentary on another student's draft report
Work due this session: Complete Draft of Project Report, uploaded to blog

Session 13. Taking Stock of Course: Where have we come and where do we go from here?

Preparation: Reading: Taylor, "We know more..."

What learning themes outlined in this article (see summary in the coda) were evident during the course? What were missing? What additional learning themes did you see?

Review your profiles from week 1 on what you brought to the course and where you would like to be by the end.

Take note of how differences between these session 1 plans and where you actually got to. Make notes to assess the difference -- what did you gain that you hadn't prefigured and what did you not gain that you would have liked to.

Bring laptop to class if you have one

Session (5/8):
Dialogue hour on how we might foster critical thinking about science-in-society
Course evaluations, via http://www.cct.umb.edu/CourseEvaluations.html

This is one of the multiple angles of end-of-semester course evaluation with the aim of:
- a) feeding into your future learning (and other work), you take stock of your process(es) over the semester;
- b) feeding into instructors' future teaching (and future learning about how students learn); Instructors take stock of how you, the students, have learned.

Work due this session: Commentary on another student's draft report, uploaded to blog

One week after session 13 Work due: Final version of Project Report
Process Review
Assignment Check-list maintained by student & scanned and submitted to instructors by email

V. BIBLIOGRAPHY

(For pdfs of readings, use the link on the password-protected course blog. For deeper consideration of the issues raised in both biomedical sciences and in interpretation, critical thinking, and ethical and political analysis, review student and instructor comments on the chapters for annotated reading suggestions.)

Allchin, D. (n.d.) "Of rice and men." SHiPS Resource Center.

American Psychological Association (2001). "New model of IQ development accounts for ways that even small environmental changes can have a big impact, while still crediting the influence of genes." (Apr. 15), http://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/2001/04/iq-model.aspx (viewed 16 Nov. 2014).

Beldecos, A., et al. (1989). "The importance of feminist critique for contemporary cell biology." Feminism and science. ed. N. Tuana. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 172-187.

Berger, J. (1980). "Why Look at Animals?," in About Looking. New York: Pantheon Books, 1-26.

Chase, A. (1977). "False Correlations = Real Deaths," in The Legacy of Malthus. NY: Knopf, 201-225.

Daniel, D., C. Fauske, P. Galeno and D. Mael (2001). Take Charge of Your Writing: Discovering Writing Through Self-Assessment. Boston: Houghton Mifflin

Darwin, C. 1859 [1964]). Introduction & Chapters 1, 3, part of 4. In On the Origin of Species. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1-43, 60-96.

Elbow, P. (1981). Writing with Power. New York: Oxford University Press, chapters 2, 3, 13

Fausto-Sterling, A. (1987). "Society writes biology/ biology constructs gender." Daedalus 116(4): 61-76.

Fausto-Sterling, A. (1989). "Life in the XY Corral." Women's Studies Int. Forum 12: 319-326 only.

Freese, J., B. Powell and L. C. Steelman (1999). "Rebel without a cause or effect; Birth order and social attitudes."American Sociological Review 64: 207-231.

Gilbert, S. F. (1988). "Cellular Politics." In The American Development of Biology, ed. R. Rainger, K. Benson, and J. Maienschein. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press, 311-345.

Gilbert, S. F. (1995) "An introduction to animal development." in Developmental Biology. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates, 1-34

Goodwin, B. (1994). How the Leopard Changed Its Spots. New York, Charles Scribner's Sons, vii-xiii,18-41,77-114,169-181,238-243.

Greenwald, N. (2000). "Learning from Problems." The Science Teacher 67(April): 28-32.
Harkness, J. M. (1994). "Vivisectors and vivishooters: Experimentation on American prisoners in the early decades of the twentieth century," ms.

Hrdy, S. B. (1981). "An Initial Inequality," in The Woman That Never Evolved. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 20-23.

Lakoff, G. and M. Johnson. (1980). "Concepts We Live By." In Metaphors we live by. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 3-6, 87-105, & 156-158.

Landau, M. (1984). "Human Evolution as Narrative." American Scientist 72 (May-June): 262-268.

Lewin, R. (1987). "The storytellers," in Bones of contention: Controversies in the search for human origins. New York, Simon & Schuster, 30-46

Marks, H. M. (2003). "Epidemiologists Explain Pellagra: Gender, Race, and Political Economy in the Work of Edgar Sydenstricker." Journal of the History of Medicine and Allied Sciences 58(1): 34-55.

Martin, E. (1991). "The egg and the sperm: How science has constructed a romance based on stereotypical male-female roles," Signs 16(3): 485-501.

Moore, J. (1986). "Socializing Darwinism: Historiography and the Fortunes of a Phrase," in L. Levidow (Ed.),Science as Politics. London, Free Association Books, 39-80.

Orel, V. and R. Wood (2000). "Scientific animal breeding in Moravia before and after the rediscovery of Mendel's theory." Quarterly Review of Biology 75(2): 149-157.

Oyama, S. (2006). "Boundaries and (Constructive) Interaction". Pp. 272-289 in Genes in Development. Re-reading the Molecular Paradigm, E. M. Neumann-Held and C. Rehmann-Sutter (Eds.) Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

Paul, D. (1997). "Appendix 5. The history of newborn phenylketonuria screening in the U.S.," in N. A. Holtzman and M. S. Watson (Eds.), Promoting Safe and Effective Genetic Testing in the United States. Washington, DC: NIH-DOE Working Group on the Ethical, Legal, and Social Implications of Human Genome Research, 137-159.

Pollitt, K. (1990). "When is a mother not a mother?" The Nation, 31 Dec., 840-6.

Rapp, R. "Moral Pioneers: Women, Men & Fetuses." Women & Health 13 (1/2, 1988): 101-116.

Rudge, D. W. (2000). "Does being wrong make Kettlewell wrong for science teaching?" Journal of Biology Education 35(1): 5-12.

Sapp, J. (1983). "The Struggle for Authority in the Field of Heredity." Journal of the History of Biology 16 (3): 311-318, 327-342.

Taylor, P. J. (1998). "Natural Selection: A heavy hand in biological and social thought." Science as Culture 7(1): 5-32.

Taylor, P. J. (2001). "Distributed agency within intersecting ecological, social, and scientific processes," in S. Oyama, P. Griffiths and R. Gray (Eds.), Cycles of Contingency: Developmental Systems and Evolution. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 313-332.

Taylor, P. J. (2002). "We know more than we are, at first, prepared to acknowledge: Journeying to develop critical thinking." Working Papers in Critical, Creative and Reflective Practice. Retrieved 20 November 2018 from http://scholarworks.umb.edu/cct_ccrp/1.

Taylor, P. J. (2004). "What can we do? -- Moving debates over genetic determinism in new directions." Science as Culture 13(3): 331-355.

Taylor, P. J. (2008). "Why was Galton so concerned about 'regression to the mean'--A contribution to interpreting and changing science and society." DataCritica 2(2): 3-22.

Taylor, P. (2019). The Social Construction of Life: Critical Thinking about Biology and Society. Work in progress. Retrieved from http://www.faculty.umb.edu/peter_taylor/645/ChaptersSynthesized.html

Underhill, W. (1999). "Shaped by life in the womb." Newsweek(Sep. 27): 51-57.

Williams, R. (1980). "Ideas of Nature," in Problems in Materialism and Culture. London, Verso, 67-85.

Woodhead, M. (1988). "When psychology informs public policy." American Psychologist 43(6): 443-454.

Worster, D. (1985). Nature's Economy, Cambridge U. P., chapters 1 & 2.

Yoxen, E. (1986). Unnatural Selection? London: Heinemann, 1-17, 157-173.