About 8 years ago, I took up running as a way to maintain a healthy weight. However, it quickly took a turn from mere exercise to a genuine passion in my life. I love to run; in fact, I signed up for the Winslow Half-Marathon on September 17, and I plan to run a marathon in December.
Since I'm so interested in running and science, I pay attention when I run across an article that blends the two. Claudia Dreifus's article, "Born, and Evolved, to Run" (New York Times, 22 Aug 2011)* particularly caught my eye because she discusses the barefoot running movement, a trend that I am part of.**
Dreifus interviewed Daniel Lieberman, a Harvard researcher who has studied "how the human head and foot have evolved over millenniums". Lieberman is a scientist cited in Christopher McDougall's Born to Run, a book about how and why humans are running animals, which I've read, so I was excited to learn more about the research that McDougall cited. His research has evidence to support a couple of assertions: 1.) human beings are evolved to run because we have a stabilizing structure in our neck that allows us to hold our neck still and 2.) barefoot running may be shown to be better overall for the body and injury prevention because modern shoes alter footstrikes.
Lieberman also discusses applications of his research for people looking to be healthier by returning to a pre-modern way of eating and running to future doctors. I find his research an interesting glimpse into how we evolved and why runners can develop injuries because of the interference of modern technology.
Dreifus' piece is clearly intended for those curious about the barefoot running movement (or runners, more generally); the title will immediately grab the attention of those who are curious about running. Most of her interview questions involved running and barefoot/minimalist running in some way; she knows about the rising tread of minimalist shoes, such as the Vibram FiveFingers and the NB Minimus, so her audience is seeking scientific validation to support the trend. While there are certainly critics of the barefoot running trend, Dreifus is not interested in exploring the controversy at all; her article overwhelmingly offers support for barefoot running style and no attention is paid to some of the drawbacks.***
Overall, I thought the piece was interesting, and I enjoyed learning some more about the research and science behind my preferred running style. Now, off to my 13-mile training run!
*Be sure to cite your articles, even if it is as informal as giving the link, the author's name, and the article title. It's a good habit to be in to always cite!
**I have run in the Vibram FiveFinger shoes and now the New Balance Minimus, and I have to say I really prefer the minimal shoes over clunky heavy shoes. However, this is not a post about my running shoes choices, so if you're interested in my opinions about the shoes, pester me after class or in the comments.
***Some folks have problems due to habit, biomechanics, fitness level, and other factors. No one should jump into a pair of minimalist shoes or start running barefoot without first transitioning slowly and carefully.
Friday, September 2, 2011
Thursday, September 1, 2011
Caveat Emptor!
Long ago, before the establishment of the FDA, the attitude in American business was caveat emptor, a fancy Latin term for "let the buyer beware." You see, the attitude was that if a consumer was dumb enough to buy goat droppings in a bottle, then that was their problem. So you had lots of folks moving around the country selling quack medicines and remedies to unsuspecting individuals who weren't educated or didn't know how to discern from the truly helpful herbal remedies passed down by grandmas and non-professional doctors and the crazy, dangerous remedies marketed by "snake-oil salesmen". (If you've ever heard that term). The FDA was strengthened under one Teddy Roosevelt* and began changing this attitude toward believing that the American public needed the government to look out for it.
This is what I was thinking about as I read through "106 Science Claims and a Truckful of Baloney" before class on Monday. If you've gotten a good sense of my personality, I seem like a fairly easy-going woman, likely reasonable and perhaps trusting. You'd be wrong on the last part: I'm deeply suspicious of institutions and companies and corporations or anyone whose primary goal is to make a buck.
Many of you commented on your blogs that you couldn't quite believe that companies could get away from selling swill to an unsuspecting public. Well...not to get too political, but the general environment of deregulation beginning with Reagan took much of the FDAs power to regulate and enforce. They can require labels and disclaimers, but it takes background knowledge and awareness to understand what those things mean, as our author pointed out in his article.
So, in effect we've moved back toward that attitude of caveat emptor. I firmly believe that one of my roles as instructor of the class is to help you understand the ways science and the public interact, and this is a major locus with severe consequences for the unknowing and uninitiated. Remember that interesting statistic--90% of Americans are interested in science but 15% feel that they have knowledge about it? Well, those 85% who don't know anything are the ones being duped, and they are the ones who need--and deserve--protection.
My questions are: how do we better educate the American public? How do we convince our legislators that regulation is not the enemy of business, but a powerful tool to protect the American public and prevent individuals from harming themselves or their health? (Or wasting their hard-earned money on crap).
Keep your eyes open and as The Who would advise: don't get fooled (again).**
*Former President, Rough Rider, and an all-around badass. Seriously. Dude shot big game and ran a country and wrote books and fought in wars. He also was responsible for our national parks. Check out his Wikipedia page if you want to learn more tidbits and random facts.
**T. Roosevelt would advise, "Walk softly and carry a big stick."
This is what I was thinking about as I read through "106 Science Claims and a Truckful of Baloney" before class on Monday. If you've gotten a good sense of my personality, I seem like a fairly easy-going woman, likely reasonable and perhaps trusting. You'd be wrong on the last part: I'm deeply suspicious of institutions and companies and corporations or anyone whose primary goal is to make a buck.
Many of you commented on your blogs that you couldn't quite believe that companies could get away from selling swill to an unsuspecting public. Well...not to get too political, but the general environment of deregulation beginning with Reagan took much of the FDAs power to regulate and enforce. They can require labels and disclaimers, but it takes background knowledge and awareness to understand what those things mean, as our author pointed out in his article.
So, in effect we've moved back toward that attitude of caveat emptor. I firmly believe that one of my roles as instructor of the class is to help you understand the ways science and the public interact, and this is a major locus with severe consequences for the unknowing and uninitiated. Remember that interesting statistic--90% of Americans are interested in science but 15% feel that they have knowledge about it? Well, those 85% who don't know anything are the ones being duped, and they are the ones who need--and deserve--protection.
My questions are: how do we better educate the American public? How do we convince our legislators that regulation is not the enemy of business, but a powerful tool to protect the American public and prevent individuals from harming themselves or their health? (Or wasting their hard-earned money on crap).
Keep your eyes open and as The Who would advise: don't get fooled (again).**
*Former President, Rough Rider, and an all-around badass. Seriously. Dude shot big game and ran a country and wrote books and fought in wars. He also was responsible for our national parks. Check out his Wikipedia page if you want to learn more tidbits and random facts.
**T. Roosevelt would advise, "Walk softly and carry a big stick."
Monday, August 29, 2011
Science is EVERYWHERE
I'll post my thoughts about the article, but I wanted to discuss a tangentially related point--science (and science claims) are all around you. I'm interested in science and scientific arguments, so I'm always listening and paying attention, and you should try to tune your mind and eye and ear to pay attention as well.
One example: this morning as I was listening to NPR, a story came on about learning styles. I grew up with this idea that I learn in a particular way--am I better at auditory or visual tasks? for example. It turns out that the science this idea is based on is problematic. I liked the quotation from one of the scientists interviewed, that anytime someone proposes the idea that there are fundamental differences to the brain, that is problematic. (We'll discuss this idea later in the semester).
The general idea is that we have particular strengths, but that good instruction will ask students to learn in different kinds of ways and switch up the teaching style to keep everyone engaged and interested. At the end of the day, what allows kids to learn better is simply keeping their attention on a topic or task.
Now I feel a lot better about never being able to understand what my learning style is--it turns out, I use them all, and hopefully I can use them all as we learn together.
One example: this morning as I was listening to NPR, a story came on about learning styles. I grew up with this idea that I learn in a particular way--am I better at auditory or visual tasks? for example. It turns out that the science this idea is based on is problematic. I liked the quotation from one of the scientists interviewed, that anytime someone proposes the idea that there are fundamental differences to the brain, that is problematic. (We'll discuss this idea later in the semester).
The general idea is that we have particular strengths, but that good instruction will ask students to learn in different kinds of ways and switch up the teaching style to keep everyone engaged and interested. At the end of the day, what allows kids to learn better is simply keeping their attention on a topic or task.
Now I feel a lot better about never being able to understand what my learning style is--it turns out, I use them all, and hopefully I can use them all as we learn together.
What Do I Want?
You'd think as an instructor for a course, I'd be defining the goals for my students, but you'd be wrong--well, partially. Sure, I have objectives that I hope are met by the end of the semester, but I also have some personal goals for the course. They are as simple as wanting to grow as an instructor and gain valuable pedagogical experience to making the class interesting. Here, in no particular order, are the things I'd like to accomplish by the end of the semester (with regards to Comp II):
- Linking content: I'd like to keep exploring the best ways to link content (science, in this case) to writing, and I hope to see how well this helps students in their writing and when they leave my class.
- Technology: I hope to keep playing with technology in the classroom and see how it can enhance my teaching and help make the material more engaging.
- Research: I may extend the work I'm doing in this course for my own dissertation--kinda scary, but I have to start thinking about what I want to research and write extensively about!
- Evaluation: I want to explore better ways to evaluate writing that actually helps students learn to write better. I commented heavily on papers last semester, and while I think that my comments helped some of the students, I worried that it overwhelmed others. So, this semester, I'm going to try a bit more hands-off approach to commenting; my goal is to provide helpful comments, but not to completely mark all over students' papers in an attempt to make them write how I think they should write. I think I'm going to try evaluating papers electronically, providing comments using Track Changes in MS Word.
That's just a brief handful of my goals for the course. I hope that you all (my student-readers) enjoy the course and material as much as I have and use your blogs to play around with ideas and practicing writing.
Thursday, August 4, 2011
Welcome to Comp II: Science Writing
Hi there! Welcome to my blog for ENGL 1023, Comp II. You've signed up for a special section, in which we'll explore the intricate workings of writing for the scientific disciplines. I'll be asking you to do some writing on your own blogs, and I'll be also posting information and blogging about science writing as well, so be sure to follow me in your Google Reader account (along with your classmates). Here's to a great semester!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)