Welcome to Science Court!
Science Court is a project designed to combat polarization in American society and strengthen democracy. It is run as an interdisciplinary course in the University of Minnesota Honors Program involving students from across the university. The students select a controversial issue and spend an entire semester studying it in depth to determine the facts (based on sound scientific research) and then argue it in a mock trial in front of a jury of citizens with a mix of views and backgrounds. The public is engaged through compelling audio, video and online content generated by the students about the preparations, trial and verdict. The trial is free and open to the public.
The 2022 Science Court case is
Grading practices at the University of Minnesota can lead to bias, stress, and disincentivize learning, new innovative student assessment methods should be adopted
This year's Science Court is in partnership with the University of Minnesota (UMN) Student Senate. This topic is inspired by a Student Senate resolution, approved on December 3, 2020, requesting an extension of the UMN policy allowing students to opt for S/N grading (Satisfactory/Not satisfactory) in any course due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The Science Court case generalizes this to a full reevaluation of how students are assessed at UMN. This is timely considering increasing concerns regarding student mental health, the increased emphasis on student diversity and equity, changes in how students learn due to the technological environment, the increase in scholastic dishonesty facilitated by the internet and social media, and the rise of remote learning.
Science Court will consider student assessment holistically exploring what is known from scientific research in domains of knowledge informing this topic and propose two main strategies, Refine versus Reform, for the Student Senate to consider.
- The "Reform" (pro) approach proposes to replace the current UMN system with alternative methods for grading and student assessment proposed in the literature and tested at other institutions.
- The “Refine” (con) approach will argue to largely retain the current UMN grading system with modifications aimed at addressing its limitations based on research findings.
Stay tuned or follow us on twitter or join the Science Court mailing list to be kept informed.
LATEST BLOG POSTS
Documentary of SciCourt 2019!
Our fantastic Grace O'Neil wrapped up a memorable year in this fantastic documentary. Definitely worth the watch! Don't forget to tune in next year for our next SciCourt Case!
The Final Verdict!
And the verdict is.... 10-5 to the Pro Team! After 3 hours of deliberation on Sunday the jury delivered their final verdict just a few minutes ago. It was a great semester full of discussion, debate, and a lot of research! We would like to thank you all for following along, but we would also like to remind you to stick around. There is still another Podcast and a Documentary about the trial on the way! Not to mention, we will be back next fall for another edition of SciCourt. Personally, as the communications team, we would like to thank all the Jury and the audience for taking time out of their weekend and coming down to Hamline University. We would like to thank the Legal, Science, and Programming Team for all the hard work they put in this semester. Finally, we would like to thank the professors for dedicating a lot of time and effort to making this class a success. Thank you again for following along, don't forget to check back soon for our final podcast and documentary!
We Take Nuclear Power to Court
What happened at Hamline University? Who had the best arguments? What in the world is Thorium? Find out the answers to all those questions and more about our trial in the podcast below!