| SROP
Science Discussion Sections, 2007 The Graduate School, Northwestern University |
||
| Return
to SROP home
page |
||
|
These 90 minute sessions will involve
all life science-related SROP participants and select faculty, and will
focus on important issues related to
science and society. Every SROP participant is
responsible for
reading the material ahead of time and participating in all
discussions. In addition, each student will be responsible for
leading
an active group discussion among participants for one selected paper
(see list of selected papers below). The student leader
should
(1) present background material to enable the discussion (2) lead a group discussion by soliciting different points of view from participants (3) submit a two-page essay that outlines the given issue and argues in support of a particular point of view. Click on this link for: Learning Objectives Click on this link for: Procedures for Students participating in SROP Science Discussions All discussions are from 8:30 - 10:00 am in Pancoe 4-103 The essay should be emailed to Mario Cragen: m-craigen (at) northwestern.edu and will be submitted to The Writing Center for analysis and feedback. Questions about format and the assignment in general should be referred to: Prof. David Brown at d-brown1 (at) northwestern.edu or 312-908-0976 |
| Week
number and date |
Faculty Facilitators | Student
Leaders and Selected Articles |
|
|
WEEK
2
|
Prof. Steve Anderson Prof. David Brown Prof. Mitra Hartmann |
Lindsay Allan: Climate Change State of denial: a bitter battle is brewing between mainstream American climate scientists and the minority who deny that human activity is causing global climate change. David Sampayo: The Higgs Boson Glimpses of the God particle? If the blips in the debris of the Tevatron particle smasher really are signs of the Higgs boson then it's not what we expected. It might mean that it's time to replace the standard model with a more complex picture of the universe. Rokeisha Cole: Genetically Modified Diseases Biocontrol arms race looms: a genetically modified disease that solves one country's pest problems could be catastrophic for another. But nothing is being done to forestall such disasters. |
|
|
WEEK
4 8:30 - 10 am |
Prof. Steve Anderson Prof. David Brown Prof. Mitra Hartmann |
Yohanis Anglero: Bioterror Friend or foe? Efforts to combat killer pathogens with new vaccines and drugs could be inadvertently writing a handbook for biowarfare. The US, home to many such "dual-use" projects, faces a tough dilemma Lisa Harris: The pharmaceutical industry and patient-interest groups Swallowing the best advice? Does funding from industry influence US groups that are supposed to represent patients' interests? To investigate, new scientist has conducted the largest survey to date of company donations. Lynette Gonzalez: Diet Fads and Health The good the fad and the unhealthy: the road to the perfectly balanced diet is littered with discarded trends and mixed messages. So where does the truth lie? New Scientist brings you an in-depth look at the facts, and explodes a few myths along the way. |
|
|
WEEK
5 8:30 - 10 am |
Prof. Steve Anderson Prof. David Brown Prof. Mitra Hartmann |
Luis Gomez: Technologically Enhanced
Humans The incredibles: they're here and walking among us: people with technologically enhanced senses, superhuman bodies and artificially sharpened minds. The first humans to reach a happy, healthy 150th birthday may already have been born. And that's just the start of it. Are you ready for your upgrade? Wynter Rice: Science and Religion (Note: this article is different from the others we will discuss, in that it is an opinion piece) Religious fundamentalists frequently inspire mockery or fear in the secular-minded for their reliance on faith and rejection of reason. In response, the fundamentalists argue that secularism is underpinned by a faith or world view far more groundless or arbitrary than their own. That faith may be said to be liberalism, democracy or progress, but, most commonly and most correctly, it is identified as science. Gabriela Quinones-Torres: Ecstasy on the Brain Some say it will kill you or poison your brain, others that it's a safe enough high if you take precautions. Despite official campaigns highlighting ecstasy's dangers, the drug has never been more popular with clubbers. Are they recklessly risking brain damage or worse, or sensibly ignoring anti-drug propaganda? |
|
|
WEEK
7 8:30 - 10 am |
Prof. David Brown Dr. Venkatesh Gopal (tentative) |
Afua Annor: Nanotechnology How safe is nanotech? As the nanotech revolution gathers pace, few are giving a thought to the impact on health and the environment. We may live to regret this oversight. Tim Downing: Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) They know what you want: if neuromarketers can find the key to our consumer desires, will they be able to manipulate what we buy? Ashley Garibaldi: Take One Genome Craig Venter plans to build a living organism from scratch. Is it a technological tour de force or is he just wasting public money on little more than a parlour trick? Mohammed Hersi: DNA profiling Will DNA profiling fuel prejudice? Keeping samples from innocent people helps to catch more criminals, but civil liberties may be the price |
|
| Extra Article: Drug discovery Research spending is rising, while the number of new drugs coming to market drops. The pharmaceutical industry needs a shot in the arm. Where will that innovation come from? |
|||