Blog

Tonight's Science Court class began our mock trial preparation for the final trial, which...believe it or not... is a mere week and a half away!  Our science team began the show tonight by presenting their domain  research to the class as a practice round for their presentations at the trial.  With expert feedback from Assistant US Attorney Tim Rank who joined us for tonight's class, the science domains are on track to tidy up their presentations for the trial and make sure that they are able to give our jury all of the necessary background research to make their final decision.  Next week, our pro and con legal teams will present their arguments in a practice round during our last class before the trial on the 23rd.  Everyone is doing some pretty incredible research and their hardwork is paying off.  We can't wait to showcase all of the work we did this semester next Saturday.  Hopefully, you'll join us as our journey comes to a rewarding end! Special thank you goes out to Mr. Rank for joining us tonight and giving us some very valuable tips on how to make our trial presentations more effective and our trial run smoothly!

For more details on what went down tonight, check out the pictures and live updates on our social media platforms using our handle @scicourt!

We've all heard of nuclear power, but how much does the average person really know about it? How important is it in the energy industry? And what is the current status of nuclear power here in the US? In this episode you'll get a crash-course in the state of nuclear power in the United States, and with it a good idea of why we're taking it to court.

Yesterday evening, our Science and Legal Teams participated in the Science Court Pre-Trial Evidence Review Challenge.  The members of the Science Team presented the sources that the class and instructors decided should be challenged on the grounds of relevance and cause.  Each domain group argued why their sources should not be thrown out of the usable evidence pool for the trial.  Judge Bill McGinnis, along with help from our guest Scientific Sources Expert, then heard arguments from both the pro and con legal teams on why they thought the Science Team's sources should be kept in evidence or removed altogether.  After some very convincing research presentations and legal arguments, Judge McGinnis made his final decision and threw out 4 of the 5 sources argued on grounds of cause in addition to removing 2 of the 5 sources argued on grounds of relevance.  That's a wrap on our pre-trial evidence review, so now you might be wondering what happens next? Stay tuned to keep up to date on the next few weeks of preparation for the our culminating semester event: the much awaited trial.  What will the jury decide? 

You may be asking yourself... why nuclear power? What is so important about it?  Well, we can't give you all the research just yet; that would be a spolier. Our science team is working hard to research nuclear power and answer all of those burning questions that you might have, but for now we thought it was time we gave you an overview on the state of nuclear power.  Our legal and programming teams worked together to create a "State of the Issue" explainer video to give our audience an overview of some of the details and facts about nuclear power.  So, what's the deal with nucelar power?  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MfPzhSxZpys&feature=youtu.be

Welcome back for year 2 of the science-court podcast! Find out what we’ve been up to in the first few weeks of class, and what we’ll be learning about and sharing with you for the rest of the semester. (Hint hint: this year’s going to be powerful!)

Still wondering what Science Court is all about and why you should be interested in it?  Take a look at this video made by our amazing Programming Team viedographer, Grace O'Neil, on what Science Court is all about and how we got to where we are now in the process.

This week the class had a very beneficial visit from one of MPR's incredible podcast hosts, Kerri Miller.  Kerri sat down with each domain research group from the science team to learn about the research that they've done thus far, and about where to go from there. She also fielded questions from the legal and media teams about how to form solid arguments, how to properly prepare for interviews, and how to effectively present information.  With her help, the resarch and work is continuing to grow in the right direction.  Stay tuned for more updates on our progress on the case and for a final sit down with Kerri as we get closer to the trial. 

 Thank you for spending our class with us Kerri Miller!  

Two weeks ago the process of selecting this year's Science Court case began with a competition in which nine teams of students pitched their ideas.  A vote narrowed the field down to three finalists, which were investigated in depth by three "case evaluation groups" (CEGs) composed of both science and legal team members. Last night, the CEGs presented their findings to try and convice the audience that their topic should be the focus of this semester.

A Q&A with Prof. Tadmor on Science Court "Aerospace engineer takes civility to court at University of Minnesota" appeared in the Inspired section of the Star Tribune on Saturday, March 16, 2019. In a conversation with reporter Gail Rosenblum, Tadmor discusses his ideas on strengthening democracy and what prompted him to act. Read the conversation at http://strib.mn/2TUe95G

Watch this short documentary about the first-ever Science Court course at the University of Minnesota.  It’s a behind-the-scenes look at the class from the first day through  the verdict!  The video was written and narrated by our podcaster, Luke Diamond, and edited by our media team member Porter Larkin.     

We would love to read your comments - you can post below. 

And that officially ends our blog posts for this semester,  written by yours truly, media team member Jill Peterson. 

Thank you everyone for following along!  See you next year.