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
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!
Thank You For Tuning In!
And that's a wrap on our Fall 2019 Science Court Trial! Thank you to Hamline University for hosting our trial in a beautful court room style classroom. Thank you also to our amazing jury members. Without your time and dedication, we would not have been able to accomplish what we did here today. Thank you to everyone who joined us in the audience both in person and online via Facebook live. We hope that you enjoyed learning more about all of the research our students have done throughout this semester. Today, proves that hardwork really does pay off! Finally, thank you to our incredible instructors Ellad Tadmor, Lauren Clatch, Scott Libin, and Collin Tierney as well as our honorable Judge Bill McGinnis for all of the advice, the hardwork, and the time that they all put into this class as well. Tomorrow, our jury will deliberate on their opinions of how things went today and what was said by the science and legal teams. On Tuesday evening, our jury will deliver their final verdict, the moment we've all been very excited for. Stay tuned to see what they decide and if nuclear power truly is our future!
A Gee-Whiz Solution to the Climate Crisis?
Nuclear energy: is it too good to be true? Find out a little about the environmental impact of nuclear engineering on the environment- and whether it's the clean energy source we should be investing in.