Biology 202, Neurobiology and Behavior- A Course Commentary

Students (and visitors) should be aware that this is a "non-traditional" science course in several respects (see course information).  Its primary goal is not to convey a particular set of observations and understandings but rather to facilitate the sharing of observations and understandings so as to generate understandings as yet unconceived and further inquiries reflecting them.’- Introduction to the course /exchange/courses/bio202/s10/syllabus.

This introduction automatically serves to destroy any possible barriers that may exist between this course and students who are afraid to even take science courses. I know plenty of times through my own undergraduate career thus far at Bryn Mawr, I have heard many students express concern about enrolling in a science course because they are intimidated. In my own experience, perhaps this is slightly biased as many of my friends seem to be interested in the humanities, yet there still seems to be a lack of interest in trying science courses. On the other hand there is an enormous stigma associated with jumping into many other courses (in different fields) with apparent ease. But why is this so? Perhaps this is one of the goals of the summer institute. How can educators find a way to make science appeal to more students?

After viewing the website about the Biology 202 course /exchange/courses/bio202/s10/syllabus, this line (mentioned above) seemed to resonate with me the most. I think it has many implications and most importantly it provides reassurance to students who may not define themselves as being as science oriented as other students. After reading through the student introductions I found it quite incredible that despite the countless number of disciplines and backgrounds that were presented in the introductions, each student was able to think about several questions to pose related to how our brains function. Perhaps the topic of neurobiology is most intriguing as it is something that all students, on the most basic level can relate with. We all have a brain don't we?

Accordingly, the course is organized to facilitate an exchange and exploration of existing observations and understandings, both from the scientific community and from our own lives, with the objective of generating, individually and collectively, understandings as yet unconceived.  As such, the course may be of interest to students expecting to do more advanced work in any of a variety of fields.

Okay, but those were the goals of the course. We all know that it’s not necessarily true that everything will go as planned when the course actually concludes, contrary to the hopes and expectations of the professor. To explore this idea, however it’s best to turn to what the students thought. What were there ideas on the course? Did it live up to their expectations?  Were they satisfied?
   

Interestingly, out of the twenty-eight students who completed the class evaluations twelve of these students stated that this course either did not count for their major, or as one student indicated, while the course did in fact count for her major, that is not the reason why she decided to take the course. Okay, so after sifting through the course evaluations to compile this data, I think it’s clear, as stressed above, that this course captured the attention of many students regardless of academic interest(s). One hurdle completed. Now, were the expectations of these students fulfilled by the conclusion of the course?  What comments and suggestions did the students offer?
 

One of the common themes throughout the evaluations was the idea that Professor Grobstein’s probed students to think in ways that they had never thought in before. Through breaking away from patterns of thought that had constituted twenty years of their lives students were now able to view the world in a different light. Some students went as far as to say that after the course their entire view and ideas of the world dramatically changed. To return, yet again, to the dichotomy between a typical ‘science’ person and ‘English’ person, several students commented that although they would never classify themselves as ‘science’ people, they both enjoyed and benefited greatly from the course as it allowed them to apply what they learned to other parts of their own lives as well as the lives of others throughout the world. On the other hand, some students did complain that there was too much philosophy incorporated into the course and that there could have been more science instead. Others insisted that they wish there was more guidance each week with relation to what they should read. Many times, students stated, they were unclear as to what to read, or they wished there was more pertinent reading materials suggested to them. For the most part, however, the positive comments appeared the most and the majority of students seemed to feel as though the course was an outlet to their life- something that they never had the chance to experience before and more importantly something that they valued greatly.
 

Taking time to reflect on the comments above, I think it is important to touch upon the idea that many students wished they had more guidance throughout the semester in this course. I thought this was relevant as we discussed this very idea earlier as my colleague shared her own experience of extreme academic autonomy in which her and her peers were essentially encouraged to create their syllabus for their course. However, she stated that it was actually much more difficult than she would have imagined to essentially create a syllabus that would please all members of the class. With this being said I think it is an important point to mention how difficult it is for a professor not only to decide on a syllabus with relevant reading material and assignments, but also where to draw the line between incorporating their own expertise on the particular subject while simultaneously trying to please a group of twenty or so young adults with enormously different desires and expectations for the course. I also found it interesting that while the majority of the students who commended the course for the fact that it allowed them to think in new ways that they have never thought before also commented that they would have preferred more guidance as far as reading material. This accentuates the question as to where is the happy medium (if it exists at all) between assigning pertinent assignments for the course yet at the same time pleasing all of the students? Perhaps this is an abstract idea that will fail to be accomplished. Nonetheless it is an excellent thought provoker for students and educators alike.

In conclusion, I feel as though it is safe to conclude that  for the majority of students Biology 202- Neurobiology and Behavior fulfilled most, if not all of the pre-determined expectations. Every student who completed a course evaluation suggested that they would recommend the course to their peers. Some students agreed that they would do the same but included an additional clause. For example, there was a "best course I have ever taken in my academic college career", a suggestion to only recommend this course to non-biology students, and  recommendation of the course to students who "have an interest in the brain, but not necessarily in science". Based on the course evaluations this course was a success. I think it is an excellent model for all science educators because it demonstrates that perhaps science courses are most effective when they are 'non-traditional; when they out-step typical boundaries that have been set by science courses to date and challenge the students to take what they learn in the classroom and apply that to their daily lives and the world around them.