SPEAKER 1: OK. So it's certainly an important topic. And let me just say a few things before we have our interesting panel communicate their thoughts on this. So the central question is, how do we incentivize our students to be adventuresome, to take courses far away from their major, to get out of their college and so on. And I can sort of think of two reasons why it's a good time to talk about that.
So first of all, as you know, Hunter in his one year as interim, he's pushing the faculty to look at the curriculum. And there's been a lot of activity in the arts college about that. So this, in a way, complements that. And then more generally, higher education is under attack and whatever and the value of liberal education is being challenged. On campus we've seen lots of discussion about practical versus liberal education, a lurch towards more pre-professional things. So it's good, I think, for us to think about liberal education topics so that we can be more articulate as a faculty.
So a couple of things we do to encourage our students to be adventuresome and explore all the different opportunities they have at Cornell, and we're all familiar with these. So one is just to cross list the course. So often you do that perhaps because two faculty are teaching it or there's a big common denominator between two departments. And so the courses of study is filled with examples like that.
But there's an interesting side effect about that. Because if you're majoring in department A and it's cross listed with department B, then you can take it as a B course, but you aren't really broadening yourself in a certain sense. So cross listing is a device. We understand it. But there are perhaps some issues that we might want to talk about.
Then there's the usual distribution requirement thing, where you have categories and menus. And you have to take so many courses from certain areas. The whole phenomena of minors, which has grown and on the campus a lot, is another vehicle that we can use to encourage students to do something different. And then you have programs like university courses, which pulls out and highlights a certain subset of courses and advertises them or promotes them to the students.
Before I introduce the panel, I'd like to just mention one monetary thing, which is there's a lot of anecdotal chat out there that the new budget model in some way discourages departments from offering courses that, say, for non majors and things like that. That actually is not true.
The parameters in the budget model are frozen in a certain way that departments are not penalized or it's sort of a neutral phenomena for another year or so. But we have to as faculty figure out the correlation between how the budget model works and whether it works against breadth of education. And so that'll be an ongoing thing over the next few months when certain parts of the budget become unfrozen. And we'll have to then deal with them.
So let me just sort of step through the five colleagues of ours who have volunteered to participate here. So Catherine Appert is Assistant Professor in Music. She's the Ethno Musicologist. She studies hip hop, global hip hop cultures, music and memory, a host of really interesting topics. She's been here on campus since 2013. And she's a faculty in residence at North Campus. And one of the interesting things that she'll enlighten us about is a program called Live Where You Learn. And when we think about getting out of your college, that's kind of a metaphor. We have all these different ways of learning now, different programs. And Live Where You Learn is an example of that.
Bonnie Comella has worked in the-- she's the Director of Advising in the Undergraduate Office of Biology and has been there for many years. Tomorrow she starts as Director of Advising in Arts and Science. But in any case, Bonnie has seen an awful lot in the advising setting. And it's very important because there's a psychology associated with taking courses far away from your major. You have to sort of be brave. And there's a role for advising. There's a role for one on one faculty advising in that context where you might say back in the '60s when I was your age, I did this and that and how important it was. So advising has a very important role to play. And Bonnie can enlighten us in that direction.
Mark Cruvellier is a professor and chair in Architecture. Architecture, as we all know, is a terrific blend of engineering and artistic ideas. So when you're an architect major, you already see a certain kind of breadth. So I think Mark can tell us a little bit about that. And also we have such a variety of colleges here through their smaller colleges that perhaps have a different view of breadth of education. And we should understand that.
Anna Haskins, Assistant Professor in Sociology. And she's been here since 2014. She studies social stratification and inequality, the sociology of race and education, ethnicity, and mass incarceration. She teaches a really interesting course on social inequality and there is a minor in that same general area. And again, in terms of having our students walk out of here with a broad view of different cultures and diversity, she will inform us about her experiences teaching in that part of the university.
And then finally, Jon Kleinberg from computer science and information science. Jon's been here about 20 years. He's one of the organizers and instructors in a very large 700 student networks course. And part of this picture is STEM education, educating non-technical students about technical and scientific and mathematical things. So Jon can give us great insights about that.
OK, so if the five panels come up here. What we'll do, we'll do them in alphabetical order. So if you can figure that out. My assumption is with no homework, just talk from the top of your head and experience and four, five, or six minutes. Trying to figure out. So Catherine, you can start. And tell us a little bit about your view of these things.
CATHERINE APPERT: Well, I'm not used to going first. Oh wait, I always go first. Thank you for that. So when I got the email from Becky about participating today, she asked me to speak about-- this feels very loud. It's OK? There's a bounce. About the living learning environments at Cornell and how they might encourage students to explore the breadth of the university.
So I'm a faculty in residence in the low rises on North Campus and I've been teaching in the Learning Where You Live program for three years, since it started. I teach a course called This Week in Pop Music and I teach another course called Bridging Difference, which is in collaboration with Dean Renee Alexander at the Center for Intercultural Dialogue.
Learning Where You Live, for those of you who aren't familiar, is a series of one or two credit courses that are caught on North and West Campus by faculty involved in those communities, either faculty in residence, house deans, faculty fellows. And they're taught often in the residences themselves or in places like the Tatkon Center. And the topics range from classes like the ones I teach on pop music to sustainability, martial arts, films, other science topics. So there's really a wide range.
And they're pitched during orientation week as, first of all, small courses where students have a kind of unique opportunity to get to really know their professors and their peers in a small group setting. But more importantly, I think more relevant to our conversation today, they're pitched as an opportunity to sort of take something that you would never take in your major, that you would never get to take in your major, in a very low stakes environment. So they're mostly not graded. They're one to two credits.
And there's a few things that I've gotten out of this experience. One has to do with advising. There's a certain amount of advising that goes on in these courses, both peer to peer advising as students from very different places in the university come together in a small group setting where they're really comfortable talking to each other and to me and are saying, I'm taking this class. What class are you taking?
Particularly the one I did this semester, where it was limited to residents of North Campus meant that it was limited to mostly first year students. And so that was a sort of unforeseen side effect of doing these classes is watching students learn about their courses from me or from their peers in the class and then go try them the next year or the next semester.
And so I think that's a little bit unique. Of course, we have advising across departments. In arts and sciences that's pretty normal for first and second year students. But I think that advising across colleges is kind of unique and something that I think is really neat about Learning Where You Live.
There's also a way in which the course help draw students to departments that they might not check out otherwise. The first two years have been really well received. And one thing that's come up explicitly in some of the evaluations from students is their intention to take more music classes or even to minor in music as a result of taking this class when they were not thinking of doing that before the class. And those questions are, of course, asked pretty explicitly because we're trying to figure out what these classes are doing.
Every year in August, I attend the arts and sciences open house during orientation where students are sort of shopping for their classes and everyone wants to look the coolest. So students come to you and take your classes. And I'm always very lonely there because what I've realized is that students who come to the music table are looking for specific things. They're looking for a music theory class, they're looking for Western art music history, and they're looking for the orchestra, the jazz ensembles. Otherwise they don't come.
So there's not even the chance to see the little signs that say hip hop, African music, music of Latinos, Latin American music, all these things that we teach. And I have to think that perhaps that is indicative of also what's happening when they look at the course catalog is that they might not even be going to certain places in the catalog and looking at what classes are available.
And so the benefit of the Learning Where You Live projects that we're doing is that they don't have to go looking for them. They're put it right there in front of them when they get to college in their first weekend as part of their orientation events. And so I think that for me, those are the things I've really taken out of that experience as sort of unique opportunities for advising that sort of draws the department. Of course, in my case it's music, but I assume these things are happening among other classes that are being taught.
And particularly the cross college element of it, I think, is really exciting. I often have students in This Week In Pop Music from the vet school, but I never have students from the vet school in my classes in the music department. Well, hopefully now I will. So that's been really interesting. And that's sort of my stream of consciousness thought on this, which I'm going to leave now. So thank you.
BONNIE COMELLA: So I'm going to come at this much more on my biology background of 20 years advising biology students. And a lot of pre-med students who I know advisors across the university are working with pre-med students. So some of our greatest challenges are to get them thinking outside of the pre-med box. So I'll speak to that as well.
But I think it's especially important today, given what's happening in our country and how it's impacting, really, the world for students to get exposure to different disciplines beyond what's required of them for the distribution requirements for their colleges. Beyond their distribution requirements, if we can be encouraging them to get outside of their comfort zone, have the guts or the competence to explore other areas. They'll be much better prepared to face the reality that really is a changing landscape.
But advisors play a critical role in that they set the tone from day one in terms of what we expect students to be doing. And there's some majors across the university, and biology can be like this, where we say, these are classes we really prefer you to take. And for many majors, especially in STEM, there's a couple of courses they need to get started on. But there's a half of a schedule that they have open that they can use to explore. And we try really hard to help students get out of that get it out of the way mentality and encourage them to take an elective in their first year. It's OK to do that.
So as much as we spend a lot of time as advisors, professional staff advisors, faculty advisors, instructors, peer advisors is another source which students get a lot of guidance. You spoke to that too. They tend to sometimes to pay more close attention to their peer advisors. We also know that when students have an opportunity to speak with alumni, that actually has a bigger impact than what all of us can tell them many times.
Because the alums are it. They're the product. And they're in a position where they can really reflect on their experience at Cornell. And in many cases, when I ask alumni, what was the most impactful course you had here? They never say a biology course. So I apologize to my biology colleagues here. But they rarely say biology. They almost always say a course that was their elective, something they didn't even take to fulfill a distribution requirement. That's what they take away.
So to give you a few examples in biology where we've tried to be creative over the years, I mean, certainly students are studying abroad quite a bit. And so that's kind of a given. We all know that. But in some disciplines, to encourage students to do something like Cornell in Washington, they think all government majors do Cornell in Washington. Students get so much out of that experience. We really can't send enough students that way and we don't send enough students to Cornell in Washington.
Some of the programs that we've developed out of the Office of Undergraduate Biology. We've engaged students in doing more service work. We started a program called the Biology Service Leaders, where students develop a sense of leadership and scholarship and civic responsibility through community service. So some examples have been the Prison Education program, conservation work, and food equity initiatives. They've also developed skills in grant writing, which is value added, for sure.
Many of our biology students, although it's STEM related, they participate in some of the engineering project teams. And that gives them a chance to engage with engineers in many cases, which sometimes they try to avoid in classes. They don't want to take engineering classes. But the project team is going to expand their exposure to working as a team, working with students in terms of marketing plans, business plans, and then of course, the technology around the project teams.
And then in some of our courses alone, I'll give you an example of a course we developed through the Biology Scholars Program that Professor Orby Lovette has really taken a hold of. It's a course where students complete a requirement in the major, evolution, and they have a large trip component to the Galapagos. So that's a given in biology, traveling to the Galapagos. For students have that experience is amazing.
But what he has folded into that is a writing seminar and a scientific illustration component. So he utilizes the artist in residence at the Lab of Ornithology to incorporate that into the program. Our students would not have otherwise taken an illustration course and they gain quite a bit by having that experience. So those are some examples out of biology.
MARK CRUVELLIER: Hello. Good afternoon. Not quite sure why I'm here. So architecture. Let me first, before I launch into architecture. My background is in structural engineering. I'm a structural engineer by training, practice, professional. And that education was incredibly narrow. I won't qualify it completely that way these days, but traditionally that's the nature of it, of an engineering program.
There are so many required courses to follow. I bucked that trend all the way through my education. And when it came to becoming a faculty member, I chose not to go into an engineering school, but in fact came to architecture. I've been now for 25 years. And I've chaired this Department of Architecture for about 12 at this point.
Architecture in and of itself is a multi-disciplinary profession, and the education for it is mandated through our Professional Accrediting Board to be multi-disciplinary. And so it's in a sense an enforced multi-disciplinary education that our students receive. I mean, everybody thinks, OK, art and science and yes indeed, those things are true. Our students have to take art studios within the architecture curriculum itself. Though they're taking courses in collage and digital representation and computation and scripting robots to do certain things.
They're taking technical courses, in structures, in environmental systems, in sustainability, in energy consumption, and living in the 21st century. There are courses in history and culture, cultural traditions. There are courses that deal with anthropological issues, how humans live in environments, in rural environments, in urban environments, et cetera.
And so what I've come to happily find is what I've sort of always believed in and looked for and tried to find in a university curriculum I actually find within the department. Now, architecture is always seen as this insular bunch of people over in Millstein and Rand. And the lights are always on and the perception is that our students never get out of there. I would argue that within those precincts, our students are exposed to an incredible range of things. But beyond that, they're also exploring the university in ways which are rather incredible.
Part of that stems, again, from our undergraduate professional degree program, which is a five year program. And so they're afforded the luxury of time within the 176 credits that they need in order to get their bachelor's degree. They actually have an extra year in which to explore. And the Professional Accrediting Board actually mandates that 45 to 50, 45 I think is the number, of those credits have nothing to do with architecture.
And so it's not even us within the discipline. We have an incredible breadth of expertise and required courses that are there and then elective courses that build on that. But then also, we sort of force students to go outside and take courses around the university. So that's in terms of curriculum.
We have had, in fact, we're celebrating this year the 30th anniversary of our Rome program. And so all of our undergraduates, we force them to go and spend a semester in Rome, which is a real hardship for them. And they come back changed people. They do that in their third year. And they're different human beings when they come back from that experience.
We have a facility in New York City. That's not mandated, but 60% of our students spend a semester in New York City as well. Again, some of these things are a matter of the extra time that the five year professional degree program allows for. But they just get an incredible diversity of exposures to different environments, urban environments, different types of courses.
Things that are actually current now in terms of community engagement and social engagement. So we do studios, our studios. I won't get into the details of that. But we have a number of faculty who are interested in developing community based programs where they go into different communities, solicit input from communities. And it's not a matter of giving it over to them, but the students and work with those community groups in order to develop projects that they hope will the successful.
I'm running a studio this semester with a community up in northern Norway. And we're going to go there in a few weeks time where they're actually looking for us to come and develop some projects for them that will sustain their community of 1,500 people. Because they want that community to thrive. We have other groups going to Bogota in Colombia, another going to Cuba, et cetera.
I don't know if I'm sounding defensive because we always hear architecture's this sort of little world unto itself and doesn't engage. I would argue that the opposite is, in fact, quite true, that there is a model within architecture that actually is reaching out to a number of different communities and different groups and different disciplines that is actually may be worth taking a closer look at.
ANNA HASKINS: Hi. So I think Charlie invited me here today to talk about a number of things that the course that I teach addresses. And so talking about cross listing as well as university minors, issues of diversity and how to get students exposed to thinking about diversity as well as talking about the university course system. And Elliot's here as well, so he can add during the question and answer period if folks are interested.
And so the course that I teach is called Controversies About Inequality. This is taught every fall and it's a capstone course for the Center For The Study Of Inequality's undergraduate minor called Minor In Inequality Studies. And I brought a some pamphlets if people are interested after the presentation. See Kim, look, I'm doing my job.
And so to talk a little bit about Controversies About Inequality, the course that I teach. It's a course that's been taught here for over 10 years. I would say close to 15 years. I myself, obviously, have not been teaching it for that long. I've taught it for the last three years. But it is a course that is cross listed with seven departments and four colleges across the university. And so in that sense, in essence, students are already getting out of their college if they're taking the course.
I think Charlie showed this is the enrollment of the minor. So this is the students that minor in Inequality Studies. All those students are required to take the course Controversies About Inequality. We're at about 260 minors across the university. And in my class itself, which is a 200 plus student class, I definitely have a little bit more representation in terms of colleges there.
It's about 1/3 CALS, 1/3 ILR. Let's say 1/4 CALS, 1/4 ILR, 1/4 arts and sciences, and about a quarter human ecology and a splash of hotel school as well as engineering students that take it. And even some art and architecture students undergraduates take the course too.
And so this is one way in which students can get out of their college, get out of their major, and take a course that addresses issues of racial diversity, gender diversity and inequality, sexuality issues as well as housing, class, criminal justice system. The class is about inequality. So any areas in which we can think about social inequality are broadly covered across the course.
So it's also a university course. And so in addition to being cross listed across all of these departments, this also has a university course designation, which allows me and actually resources to pair with other things at the university to expose students.
And so what I mean by things is that I actually this year paired with the Johnson Art Museum to bring students to the Johnson Art Museum to have them look at visual images of inequality and apply some of the skills and knowledge they learned throughout the course to looking at art and thinking about art as a representation of inequality. And so the university course designation allows the resources and puts those connections in place for that.
The course also brings out inequality scholars. This is a course that's in sociology, so most of those scholars that come out are sociologists. But it exposes students to scholars doing work in inequality outside of the university. So in addition to getting students out of their college, it also exposes them to people doing work outside of the university in these really important areas.
And so this year I brought out Kathy Eden, who's a Harvard sociologist who just released a book called $2 A Day. In addition to a number of other people, we also brought out Matt Desmond, who is a sociologist at Harvard as well. And actually Kathy Eden is now at Johns Hopkins, sorry. Harvard as well and who was recently given the Genius Award, the MacArthur Grant. So his book is Evicted. And so students who took my class were required to read the book. And then Matt Desmond and the other authors came and spoke with the students and they got to engage with these scholars.
And so in this sense, even students who aren't majoring in sociology are exposed to scholars doing this work as well as broader issues of diversity, of social inequality that may not have access to classes in a sense. I want to talk a little bit about the minor briefly before I transition as a way for students to really get out of their college as well as to foster adventurous students.
I went to the arts and sciences curriculum meeting last week. And President Rawlings really started it off by saying he has been concerned by how parents are really guiding students towards the types of majors that they need to be, how they should be in business or engineering. And this is really drawing students away from a broader understanding of what a liberal arts education is.
And I actually often engage with this with the students I interact with in my Controversies About Inequality course. And I often pitch the minor, this minor in Inequality Studies, as a way to appease both their personal interest as well as continuing to major in biology or engineering or pre-med as their parents might want.
And I think that's actually a really fascinating and great benefit that Cornell has, this minor system, that I think a lot of other universities don't have. And so I think that advisors could really push minors, and not necessarily even this minor in Inequality, but push minors as a way for students to really think more about how they can pursue their personal interests in addition to these more potentially practical or lucrative or however you want to give the adjective for them, the majors that might be something that their parents are most interested in, or parents' expectations.
Let me think. What else is there? I think the last thing that I want to say is that I often, and this has been really interesting, the students that I get in terms of year in Controversies About Inequality are about 1/3 sophomores, 1/3 juniors, and 1/3 seniors. And so when we think about being strategic advising wise about when to get students to start taking these courses outside of their majors or outside of their colleges, I would think sophomore and junior year is about the right time for this.
I mean, freshmen aren't quite ready to even think about what's in their college or major. It's hard for them to step outside of that. And so I think Controversies About Inequality is a class that sort of models in some way this thing. So there are very few freshmen in the class and it's majority upperclassmen that take it and it allows them to sort of think about how they want to add this minor potentially to their experiences here at Cornell.
JON KLEINBERG: Thanks. So I'm Jon Kleinberg in Computer Science, Information Science. And I guess what I think I'm supposed to do on the panel is talking about the evolving nature of courses in STEM. So courses at this interface of science, technology, engineering, and math. And I guess from a computing perspective in particular, which is where I come from.
I think the Networks course, which Eva Tardos, David Easley, and I co-teach in different pairwise arrangements each year, is sort of a reflection of the changing nature of STEM courses and kind of representative of the sort of opportunities that are emerging at the interface between science and technology disciplines on the one hand and the rest of the university, even for students where this may be the only contact that they have with a science or technology course.
And I think the reason there's this opportunity at the interface is because there is a similar interface developing in the world outside the university. If we think about the kinds of systems that we deal with every day, they're fueled by huge amounts of data and computing. The way we think about debates about policy that are fueled by new, massive, and novel sources of data.
The changing nature of the way we engage in commerce, the changing nature of education, of the news media, of the political process, of local organizing because of social media. All of these are places where we take systems that have existed in the world for a very long time and they're now being blended with the technological platforms that we've built over the past 20 years in ways that are both reinforcing some of their existing properties and also changing them in ways that are sometimes quite subtle.
And so I think there's something there for both people who don't think about computing to come to terms with and to sort of look at these with some [INAUDIBLE] type of computing. There's also something very important that I think computer science students and students [INAUDIBLE] disciplines can learn from engaging with all of these topics.
So when David Easley and I were first thinking about this course, David my original co-instructor in this comes from the economics department. So we wanted to really sort of blend his perspective on economics and social sciences with some of what I was trying to bring from computer science and information science.
And certainly from my own perspective, I was trying to model this on courses that I found really valuable when I was an undergrad where this may have been my one semester of contact with some area that I was neither intending to major nor minor in. But through this one course, and it's sort of amazing how many of them were very well done, one course has the ability to convey a world view. It's able to take situations that you're familiar with from the nonacademic side of your life, things that you've seen about the news, things you've interacted with personally, and it presents you with a way of thinking about it that may be new to you.
And that sort of helps inform your own thinking going forward. I think if we can impart that to students, if each of these large new courses represents a distinct worldview that they haven't encountered before, then if you add that up over four years at Cornell, they can end up with a lot of very valuable perspectives that they can bring to bear.
And the world view that we wanted here is really how do we think about this blend of the computational and the social? How do we think about simple mathematical models of social systems? I was also thinking, for technical students in particular, for computer science students with whom I'd had the most experience, to whom I taught algorithms, to whom I'd taught discrete math, these students were going out in the world and they were actually building these things.
If you think about the Amazon recommendation system that determines a lot of what you buy, if you think about the search rankings that Google which determines a lot of how you find information, or the news feed ranking on Facebook, which determines a lot of how the information that you get is filtered to you through the things that your friends share.
All of these when you get down to it are being built by people who have largely computer science training. And yet they engage with so many distinct issues. Think about the Amazon recommendation system to take actually one of the less controversial, something which is on the surface less controversial, certainly relative to things like the changing nature of social media, Facebook and so forth. But even the Amazon recommendation system, we often think students think technically about it. I have to harness the massive amounts of data at my disposal. I have to use algorithms to recommend products.
But of course, they're also by the choices they make, determining an economic model for how products are going to be sold in the world. If you think about the entertainment industry, are we going to emphasize a small number of giant blockbuster creations or are we going to emphasize the long tail of niche content? A lot of that will actually be determined by the choices they make in building the recommendation system. Similarly, are we going to live in a world where we mainly get information that's sort of like what we already know or are we going to expose to different viewpoints or often contrary viewpoints?
A lot of that will be also determined by the way in which these students create these recommendation systems. Will things be fair or transparent? Will books about changing your career to a high paying executive job be mainly recommended to men possibly through accidental features of the way the data was constructed and interpreted by the algorithm? All of these are sort of up for grabs.
And what you should find potentially slightly worrisome is that no one sits down to make these decisions in advance, typically. What typically happens is people think about the technical challenges they face working with this mass amount of data. They're trying to sell products on this platform. Certain choices get made and the consequences then can have actually effects that no one really intended.
And so you think, what can we do about this? One thing is we should have these product teams consist of a representative from each discipline that could possibly impinge on them. Maybe all 25 or 30 of them. They could sit Security council style and every time any decision has been made, they would vote on it. That will never happen. It's completely unwieldy. Because the people building these systems are making many of these decisions each and every day. And more, and maybe this is the most important thing, often they're not even realizing at that moment that they're making a decision. They're doing something that seems natural to them.
So another thing you could do would be to try exposing these students to as many of these perspectives as possible so that when they're at the point of making these decisions, first of all, they realize it is a decision. And secondly, they'll have some of the tools to reason about it that come from many different areas.
And so I think that was, when I thought about what could this do for computer science students, that was kind of what I thought about. If in this course, I could impart to them, this is one semester of things you should know from many different areas when you go to work at Amazon, to work at Facebook, to work at Google.
So that was the sense in which the course sat at the interface. It was really for students not coming from a technical background, exposing them to the way in which technology is pervading all of these things in their lives. For students coming from a technical background, to think about all of the often unplanned choices that they make when they build these technological systems.
So I should mention that the Networks course was sort of an experiment in a style of course that I think is increasingly enshrined in the way that we think about teaching computing at Cornell. The Information Science major, which is now about 10 years old, I think also reflects this in its intentional blending of many different areas ranging from the analytical to the design to behavioral science to interpretive and qualitative and ethnographic areas.
The course itself, when we thought about networks, we thought about networks quite broadly. This gives an example of the kinds of things they touch on, ranging from the connectivity among blogs, the results for political polarization, to the way in which our friends, the changing nature of the friendship links that we form on a site like Facebook to the economic networks that exist in society in the financial industry all the way to really physical networks, road networks which supply a lot of the infrastructure to the country.
So the course was cross-sectional in that sense. Networks and the theme of creativity was sort of a theme on which to hang a lot of these issues. It was also cross-sectional in the fact that it was explicitly cross listed. It was cross listed between computer science, information science, economics, and sociology. And CSIS and economics were sort of represented in the initial instructors, David Easley and me. Sociology provided just huge contributions intellectually to the course and also just in offering its cross listing. We benefited a lot from colleagues.
And in a sense, those discussions grew out of institutions on campus like the Institute for the Social Sciences. And in particular, this networks course came out of a theme year on networks that was chaired by Michael Macy and involved a lot of us who were part of the planning of the course.
And It also was cross sectional in a sense that it satisfies a number of distribution requirements. Which I think sort of implicitly [INAUDIBLE] what's been said here, a number of things that have been said here, can actually help incentivize students. I think a lot of engineers are in this course for the simple reason that it satisfies the SPA distribution for them. And whether or not that's the sort of overt reason they take it, we hope that once they're there, we can impart these kind of broader world views that we hope they'll use going forward in the world.
SPEAKER 1: OK, thank you everybody. And now we'd like to have questions from the audience. Yeah, Bruce.
AUDIENCE: [INAUDIBLE] from science, technology studies, and communication. And key thing there is those two are in two separate colleges. So I'm a voting member in two colleges.
And I think if we're talking about trying to get students out of colleges, I think we have to get faculty out of colleges as well. Because there are different conceptions of what it is we're trying to do in our different colleges. And I think part of what makes Cornell work is the creative tension among those variety of things. And the challenge for us is how to handle some of those logistic things like cross listing.
So for example, there are different cultures in CALS and arts about what counts as a three credit course or a four credit course. And some of this came up in the faculty senate last year about I guess some kind of audit about what might happen. Shouldn't use the word audit. That'll cause a lot of problem. Some kind of review of that.
But I think it's those kinds of logistic problems that make it hard for us to cross list some of these courses. The fact that the arts college faculty have chosen to require 100 credits of 120 in the arts college, whereas CALS requires 55 credits in CALS. Now, some of that has to do with where one can go to fulfill the requirements. But it limits the choices for people in one college in ways that are not limited for students in other colleges.
I doubt that any of us who are in this room question the fundamental assumption of this panel, which is that we should get people to break out of individual disciplines. The challenge for me is how do we, at a nuts and bolts level, how do we do that?
SPEAKER 1: So Jon, the departments that are involved in the Networks course, it was just you knew individuals ahead of time and it just happened? Or did you have issues like Bruce was mentioning?
JON KLEINBERG: I mean, it's a great question of course. So I think on the Networks course in particular, it was really this thing that was facilitated by the University to the Institute for the Social Sciences. And we proposed this team project on Networks led by Michael Macy. And then I think once the group was together, it sort of self-organized from there. And then we use the personal connections that we had in each of the departments.
You'll notice that at some level, there were many departments that could have been represented in the cross listing. Communication would have been a very natural one. And Geri Gay was a very active member in that team project. So it was something we talked about. Was it the logistical challenge that meant we didn't cross list it? It's hard to say.
But I certainly know that if I think about other places where there's been these cross college connections, again, I think my experience in information science has been that having these things that set the boundary which we can have joint appointments that reach across colleges has been very useful. Information science is an example of a department that offers a major in each of arts, engineering, and CALS.
And I think that the more we can create those kind of departments that are on the boundary. But we've certainly seen a lot of these issues in [INAUDIBLE]. We've had exactly the question that when we go to create a course, the approval process and the expectations in each college are going to be different and then there's kind of a reconciliation process. So I agree that I think sort of thinking about these issues is very important.
SPEAKER 1: Bruce mentioned the requirement in arts and science that you have to do at least 100 credits in the college. I mean, is the philosophy behind that sort of similar to what Mark was talking about in architecture? Is that really a constraint or is it a sore point? How do we think about that?
AUDIENCE: It's a sore point outside the college of arts and sciences.
SPEAKER 1: What about within?
AUDIENCE: I don't know. I have to admit that although I'm a member in both and I'm currently a chair in arts and sciences, most of my life has been in CALS. So I don't actually have a good feel for the discussion in arts and sciences. I know that I've heard it complained about not just in CALS but in other colleges.
BONNIE COMELLA: We feel that pain point too, Bruce. We're just like you in so many ways. And faculty in one department that have joint appointments. And I would agree that in biology, our lead college is CALS. So we cross our T's and dot our I's based on what CALS needs us to do and we find arts to be really flexible in terms of proposing new courses and such.
And the cross list in particular is challenging. I'm sitting here listening to Jon and all these cross lists. I know a lot of my advisees take this course. And I think, gosh, we just don't do that in bio. The only departments that we allow to cross list is a CALS expectation or faculty who are teaching the course.
And so it does. It's very limiting. And I'm not sure how to solve it. It might be really interesting to get a few of the colleges together for these joint majors, these cross majors. Biology and society, biology, information science, and try to identify those pain points are for faculty and for students and see if we can start to kind of break down those barriers so we can just make it more simple and more transparent for students to take courses across the colleges more easily.
ANNA HASKINS: I wish I could actually contribute to this question. I inherited this class, which was already cross listed with four colleges. And so I can't speak to how that was initiated when it was. But I do think it sounds like, I mean, there are difficulties if you were to create a new class and try to incorporate the needs of both or the expectations of the two or the three colleges that it's cross listed.
I still deal with the troubles of dealing with students in all these different colleges as they register. And I do know that oftentimes whatever is the home college kind of gets the say of things. And so I think that that's just something to think about. So it's in arts and sciences. And so it's easy to cross list with other departments that are in arts and sciences. That's a very simple task. Oftentimes you talk with the undergraduate coordinator and involve the staff that's involved with undergraduates and then they kind of put that together. But I have never had to interact and try to add another college to the course since I've started. So I can't speak to that, but I can imagine that it would be a difficult thing to do.
AUDIENCE: So I'm getting old enough that I can speak to the history [INAUDIBLE]. It was actually devised, I think it was voted on by the faculty senate. The minor in Inequality was voted on by the faculty senate with this course built in. It was actually funded by [INAUDIBLE] originally. I mean, in some sense it was the first university course before there were any university courses.
I mean, I think this question about sort of the structural barriers to collaboration is really important. I think I see it from a different perspective. So I teach an undergraduate Inequality course that's actually a companion to Anna's. It's cross listed now in three colleges. And I say that the students can come in, but the TA resources do not come in.
So for example, I think I have 86 students from arts, 90 students from CALS, and then 60 or something from human ecology. Arts is paying all those TAs. So that becomes a barrier. basically I've had to cap the class and say, no, forget it, you guys have to go away because [INAUDIBLE]. Organizational barriers to what you might think of as a rational obligation [INAUDIBLE].
MARK CRUVELLIER: I mean, that type of thing happens with us as well. I mean, we've offered an Introduction To Architecture course to Cornell students. And there was a time when we had 700, 800 students in there. In order to support it, I had to take TA support away from our own courses in order to support that. And in the end, we couldn't sustain it. So we cap that now at 150. And have a few TAs to cover it but otherwise can't do it.
SPEAKER 1: Yes?
AUDIENCE: Hi, I'm [INAUDIBLE] university courses. Thank you all. And this is another [INAUDIBLE] question but for Mark. I wish I had studied architecture so I could spend a semester in Rome and a semester in New York and go to Norway. And I'm really curious about how those are funded. Does that come out of tuition, does that come out of endowment? I'm aware of the Galapagos example that's receiving support for various programs plus outside funding support. Is this a barrier to students who wish to participate in architecture if this is a tuition [INAUDIBLE]?
MARK CRUVELLIER: So there are no barriers. So Rome and New York are mandated. Or Rome is mandated. It costs a little bit more to get there, but the tuition is the same, the housing is a bit more. So if they need financial aid, financial aid actually gives them a bit more money in order to spend the semester there. But it's a marginal difference.
Part of what has funded our New York, which is an add on in a sense, is about 10 years ago we started a professional master's degree program. And so we actually grew our department from a 300 student department to now about a 400 student department.
And at the graduate level, we're competing with other schools of architecture where this type of thing is the norm. So one could not be competitive with Harvard and Yale and Princeton if one were not doing these things. And so we actually use some of that tuition to fund such travel. And in an indirect way, the undergrads are benefiting from that.
SPEAKER 1: Yes.
AUDIENCE: I'm [INAUDIBLE] from ILR. So I think that getting back to the points about constraints to actually doing this. So I think the lack of clarity about the budget model. We just have a two year freeze or whatever. I think that is a problem. It would really help us think more creatively once we knew who was paying for the TAs and how our college is going to get compensated for students taking classes outside. I think that's one issue.
The second issue that I've been having is we have a course which is ILR is for freshmen and sophomores of the 200 level or 2,000, whatever you use. We have lots of students from the arts college who are seniors who want to take the course.
Now, I don't know whether you have rules in the arts college that somebody who is a senior cannot take a 2,000 level course. But the 2,000 level course is [INAUDIBLE] at the 2,000 and it's really not fair to 2,000 level students if seniors can take it and do better at the course [INAUDIBLE]. So I don't know how you deal with that issue. [INAUDIBLE].
BONNIE COMELLA: Yeah. There's registration strategies where you can reserve cap courses. And you can use language in the description of the course that ILR sophomores get preference. We've had to do that with an ILR course in stats where bio students were taking the IRS ST 2100.
AUDIENCE: It's not so much giving them preference. We can give them preference. But we could fill a class, let's say, 100 people. Do we allow people from other colleges who are at the 400 level? I mean, seniors, can we allow them to take the course? That's the question. Because if that's the culture in the arts college to allow seniors to take courses at freshman level and sophomore level, how does our policy mesh with yours?
CATHERINE APPERT: I should say that most of my classes at the 1,000 and 2,000 level are full of seniors from other departments and colleges. So we have that problem going both ways. And it's not a problem of them taking places, as you're saying, but how do you assess students in a course that's meant for first year students where seniors are sort of setting the bar.
And I've finally just started saying to myself, it's a first year level class and that's how it's assessed. I don't know if that's right. I don't really know how to deal with it. I don't think you can have two different standards for students in the class depending what year they are on the program. But it's an issue that goes both ways.
And it relates back to, Anna, you were talking about having a lot of seniors in the course that you're talking about. And it seems unfortunate to me that they're not there until they're seniors. Because if they were there as second year students or third year students, who knows what other courses they might take afterwards? And so I think there's also this question of advising.
How can we advise so that the fourth year students who want to take that class are figuring out that they want to take it in the first year second year of their studies, which is not the same question you were raising, but I think one that that's related and important. How do we make it so that engineering students are taking a music class in their second year and not in their final semester as the fun easy thing they're doing? Which they're entitled to do, but it's a shame that they're missing opportunities in the process.
BONNIE COMELLA: So there is no philosophy in the arts college about seniors taking sophomore level courses. But I'm turning to the instructor for the course whether it really changes the climate in the course. And I think it's certainly up to them. They're happy to take art students, but they just don't want the seniors. And I think there's some courses you may need to do that depending on capacity. What course is it?
AUDIENCE: It's [INAUDIBLE].
JON KLEINBERG: Yeah, I mean, in the Networks course, certainly, I think we have students from all different, freshman through senior. Although I feel like probably if some students feel like others have more background, it's potentially more from the enrollments from different colleges. Since we're doing some out of mathematical models.
And so the engineering students. We try very hard to make sure it's clear that we're not tilting the course toward the engineering students. The effect is, for a lot of them, they have more than enough background because we're pitching it as lower level.
We actually sort of made certain decisions that even simple things like notation. So what is the mathematical notation we're going to use? And we basically created a kind of vocabulary that we're going to use that notation and we will never use this notation. Because certain students felt like when we went to that notation, we were speaking in code to half the class and leaving the other half out. And so even certain very superficial seeming decisions, I think, did have an effect on the nature of the class.
ANNA HASKINS: I would just add two things. One is that the class I teach is a 2,000 level class. So it's technically geared towards sophomores, if you were thinking about that. Although I've never really gotten the impression that that's how it should be is that it's supposed to be a 2,000 sort of second year student course.
What I do get is that I think students that are seniors expect less work to be given in 2,000 level courses. And that's the only push back that I really see is that I think seniors think this is supposed to be easier than I thought it would be. I also think that it is very much up to the faculty to decide sort of if that's what they want.
I think in courses like sociology, and particularly a course that addresses a broad array of inequality, something that we discuss is going to be new to students regardless of what year they are. And I think in that sense it's not really a problem if you come with four years of experience at Cornell or one year of experience at Cornell to a class that really gets into issues of broad social and global inequality.
But I can see where that would be something that, if it was a more technical course, where you were potentially supposed to come with statistical or computational knowledge and it was geared toward that group and then students would be sort of put off. So I really think it depends on the content and the course, the faculty, the sort of purpose of the course.
SPEAKER 1: Yes.
AUDIENCE: [INAUDIBLE] Department of Natural Resources. In some ways this is more of an observation than a question. I've been involved in advocating for cross college [INAUDIBLE]. Natural resources several years ago gave up our own major and developed a CALS major [INAUDIBLE] and now at least there are some of us who are trying to achieve this with the arts college as well. The things I hear from my colleagues, everybody here is a product of financial issues. That's come up a lot.
There's a lot of pandering within CALS what's this going to mean for us financially. There's also a cultural issue though that I see a lot which is a lot of insularity, I think, within departments within colleges. I think probably the people in this room are less inclined to be that way. But I know that listening to the discussions going on in our own department, there were a lot of people who were afraid actually that by getting out of our own college, somehow we were losing something.
Now, I'm a faculty member of CALS. I was actually an undergraduate student here in the college of arts and sciences. So I'm already inclined to think that it'd be useful for us to bridge with arts and sciences. There must be something out there that would be valuable to our students. But I don't always hear that from my colleagues.
SPEAKER 1: Yep.
AUDIENCE: Yeah. I think implicit in these last few questions is just the sort of structural nature of the different colleges, that some are more professionally oriented, some have more sort of tracked curriculum for virtually everyone. And some are more of a call it a liberal arts curriculum or a general interest curriculum or something that is not as tracked. And so even the question of who's the 2,000 level course serve.
And I think in the liberal arts curriculum it's sort of assumed that you may be taking upper courses by your junior and senior year in your major field of study, but that you would be exploring other fields out of interest or out of adjacent fields. And I think that's another it may not implicitly be a structural barrier, but it becomes a structural barrier just because of the way the colleges function differently. Again, an observation not a question.
SPEAKER 1: Becky?
AUDIENCE: So thanks for this interesting panel and great discussion. I'm siting here thinking about cross listing and what it means and what purpose does it serve. And so for the two of you who have substantially cross listed courses, is that about marketing? Is it about getting students from other colleges to get their home college credit if their home college requires X number of credits from your home college? is it about teaching effort? Are these team taught courses [INAUDIBLE]?
JON KLEINBERG: Yeah. You may have [INAUDIBLE]. I agree. I think the whole issue of what does cross listing mean hasn't really been fully conceptualized. I think different people use it differently. For us, I think it started because we wanted to represent the departments. So it was a co-taught course between economics in David Easley's case, computer science in my case. We were both members of the Department of Information Science.
So at some level, I think there was a sort of rhetorical value in conveying that this is the scope it covers. Although Michael Macy and David Strang have never taught the course with us, they had a huge impact on what it looked like and it felt like that reflected their contribution. So I think it was in part I supposed to be a statement to the students that this is the scope of the course. I think the course would come across very differently had it been an economics course. It certainly would have come across very differently had it been a computer science course.
Now, you could say fairly that cross listing is a very heavyweight institutional mechanism to simply make a statement about what we think the scope of the course is. Unfortunately, these departmental affiliations, I think, have a big impact on how the students perceive the course. It also has a big impact, I think, on how people are going forward perceive the course when a student has this on the transcript when they bring it up at a job interview.
So I think although it seems like we're using a kind of administrative solution to a rhetorical problem, I think it does actually have a big impact with the cross listing. So I'd say in our case it started from trying to be a reflection of the people who created the course. But I think it has had that value that it's able to convey to the students what it covers, and the students then to convey to the rest of the world what they've learned from it.
ANNA HASKINS: So I would say that for Controversies, the course that I teach, I think that within the arts and sciences, so for the departments that it's cross listed with in arts and sciences, I think it allows students to appease some departmental major requirements that they might not be able to do otherwise. I mean, what's interesting is it doesn't really matter.
As long as the course is cross listed, it doesn't matter what you register under it as. So as long as it's cross listed with government, you can still register for it under soc. And I think that's also confusing and doesn't make a ton of sense in the way that it's set up. But I think part of it is to address that.
I think the other part is that the course is pretty interdisciplinary. And so again, similar to your comment, its cross listing is to reflect the broad disciplines that it tries to address. And so in our sense, it is within arts and sciences crosses with philosophy because there is a section on philosophy that goes forth, sociology, American studies, and government. But it's then also cross listed with PAM as well as DSOC and ILR. So those are other colleges.
And I think in that sense, it does reflect. It allows students the flexibility in those other colleges to use this course toward their credit in the colleges that doesn't take away from the arts and sciences requirement credits, the minimal amount of credits that they're allowed to take with an arts and sciences.
And it also, I think, does reflect in many ways policy, the labor and industrial relations, and as well as the development part. Because we do a section on globalization and global development. So I think it's a little bit of all of those things. It's both to reflect the material as well as to be strategic about giving students access that they can actually use the course towards some requirements that they have in their own college.
JON KLEINBERG: I think actually one subtlety there is [INAUDIBLE]. If of course satisfies a certain requirement, at least in all the majors I'm associated with for advising, it doesn't matter what you signed up under. It was the same content.
On the other hand, if economics is saying we want our majors or minors to have taken at least as many econ courses number 2,000 or higher, then somehow the cross listing serves as a vetting of that course that is within the category. And so it does serve as a very compact summary of what are the things that it can satisfy, even if the student didn't [INAUDIBLE].
AUDIENCE: [INAUDIBLE]. My sense is that-- So I'm in sociology, which is one of these disciplines that has spread across the university. And sometimes I think it's more efficient. Because this reduces the incentive for policy analysis and management, for example, to offer a 2,000 level course on inequality.
They don't need to do that because there is one already and it's cross listed and it has [INAUDIBLE]. I'm taking on [INAUDIBLE] about it. I think that in some sense it can sort of fight against the-- it's an organizational way to prevent the inter college fighting that can happen otherwise. Especially in a [INAUDIBLE] where people at least perceive that [INAUDIBLE].
SPEAKER 1: Yes.
AUDIENCE: [INAUDIBLE]. I just wanted to raise a question of [INAUDIBLE] experience at Cornell, students getting outside of their colleges and interacting with students from other colleges. Teachers teaching students that are outside the college. There are no barriers across college enrollment. And it's a way to encourage students to think outside the box [INAUDIBLE]. I'm just wondering if people on the panel can speak a little bit to [INAUDIBLE] outside the college.
BONNIE COMELLA: I'll comment there is a handout by Elliot on the other side. It says, why STEM majors need the humanities. And it speaks to the writing piece in terms of our STEM students really needing to develop the skills in telling a story and not just knowing the science. So the writing piece for our students is important. Whether they take advantage of it or not is beyond even the writing seminars. Well, we hope that hooks them.
I had a student who studied abroad in Germany and she came back as a senior and said, I wrote the longest paper I've ever written while I was abroad. And I said, how many pages was it? She said 10. And I thought, oh.
But it's not about necessarily always the length and that's not necessarily always the goal in the writing seminars. But it's really important for our students to develop those skills. And I would love to hear strategies on how we can encourage them to do that more. I think the writing seminar certainly inspire many of our students. Just wish they would take it one step further.
MARK CRUVELLIER: I mean, for our students in the professional degree program, so freshmen writing seminar is done in their first year. We have two history of architecture courses, which are actually sort of building upon that and in fact require quite a bit of writing in and of themselves. They're sort of heavily supported with TAs and discussion groups and reading and writing exercises. I mean, I think to limit it to whatever it is, one or two writing seminars, is just barely touching what is needed.
So we've found that it's a university requirement, they do it. But we actually have to do more of it in-house. I mean, the writing, some of them are fantastic. But more and more writing, what you get is barely legible these days. And the copying and the plagiarizing is a nightmare. So getting people to think critically is part of what our agenda is. And doing that in writing is certainly an important aspect.
ANNA HASKINS: The class I teach just so large that it would be really difficult to do writing well. And I think that is a problem. And so if we want to have students engaged with issues of diversity, particularly racial diversity or issues of inequality with regard to gender or sexuality, we want them to really pursue those issues in depth.
And my course introduces students to those issues, but they don't have enough time to talk through those, nor do they have really opportunities to write about them. And that's because I don't have the TAs or the time to really implement those types of exercises. And so, I mean, I think it's really important. But I don't think that it's necessarily, I mean, it's not getting done in my course. So I don't have multiple choice exams, so students write.
ANNA HASKINS: No, no, I know you didn't. I'm more saying I think it's really important and yet it's not happening. And I think the students do write and they write a lot. But the feedback that they need, the engagement that they need to do with those writing. So my exams are all written essay exams.
And the students freak out because lots of them are not sociology majors. And many of them are from the sciences and they've never had to sit and write an essay exam before with broad ideas and questions, not something that's pretty memorizable and things like that.
And so I think students, they don't have those skills. When I see sophomores, juniors, and seniors and they're writing, it is embarrassing. Not even freshmen, I mean, if they haven't had a chance to work through a couple of years of writing. And so I think that's something that's really important to do. And cross listing courses or having broader reach or getting out of your college and forcing yourself to write about things that are not something that's of your major is really important.
MARK CRUVELLIER: And I would just add that as important as that is, and I would defend it to the end, in this day and age, some kind of literacy and visual culture is also absolutely essential. Whether it's media studies or any other forms of visual culture. And it's actually preposterous that as a university, there aren't any sort of requirements in that realm.
Oral communication as well. I mean, writing is the one we just fall back on, I guess. But these other means of communicating are just as relevant and important and all the more so today.
CATHERINE APPERT: I would just echo Anna's observation that, I hate to say it, but writing has to do with resources. I lost a TA for a class this year and the consequence was that the class lost a lot of its writing because I just didn't have the time to give the kind of feedback that students need for there to be a point for them to be doing all this writing. And I think that that is a plague across the college and it's one that we need to address somehow. Because students shouldn't be graduating with a bachelor of arts degree and not be able to write a coherent paper. And that's unfortunate.
But I think your question was about the writing seminars and how they sort of help address this issue of breadth. And I would say we don't really have first year music majors, but we do have music first year writing seminars. And I do think that they're very effective.
Also my first year advising, I have students come in who they know exactly what they're doing, but they're taking a writing seminar in German fairy tales or something. That seems totally random. And I think do think that they're effective in sort of getting students out into other departments and other courses that they might not take otherwise. So I just wish that in terms of the writing we could do a better job of continuing that through their liberal arts education.
SPEAKER 1: Yeah, Becky.
AUDIENCE: One more question to you, Catherine. One of the interesting things about the structure of the Living Where You Learn courses is that they're one or two credit and mostly [INAUDIBLE] they're highly accessible to students who are in their first year, perhaps, trying to figure Cornell out and figure out how to succeed in our first year courses.
So I'm wondering whether that format, do you get some of the students that otherwise tend not to explore Cornell as much? Like engineering students or some of the majors that tend to have [INAUDIBLE]?
CATHERINE APPERT: It's hard for me to actually get a ton of engineering majors in my hip hop and pop music classes. So I'm not sure about that. But I will say that the students I get, especially first year students, who are taking my, for example, pop music class, are often not taking anything else outside of what they've already decided their major is. And this is the thing they can do. And that's actually the first year we did them they were mostly half credit classes. And we bumped it to a credit for that very reason so that students could have a sense of the utility of the course.
And the first time I taught, we had seniors and juniors in the class and they were the ones who figured out that this does count as an academic credit somehow, like it can help them graduate. My class was graded this year, but that was a scheme on my part to try to string them along together for some kind of teaching relief in the future. But yes, they're very low stake. And I would say that in my experience is students who are in them are often not taking things elsewhere in the university. But not always. Some of them are also all over the place. So it's hard to say.
SPEAKER 1: How about S-U in general? I mean, that's another way of lowering barriers. Do all of you feel that that's an OK device? I mean, S-U sometimes is not allowed in certain courses.
ANNA HASKINS: The students can't take my course S-U because it's a capstone course for the minor. So they have to take it graded. So it's not an option.
JON KLEINBERG: We have a fair number of students who take the course S-U. And I mean, certainly in our experiences, they tend to put in much more than the minimum. I mean, you always worry, what if they do the minimum work they need to do to get the S? But I think in practice, I think most people who we talk to in office hours who are taking it S-U it's because of a sense of risk aversion. They're not sure that it's right for them.
But then once they're in there, they realize it's OK and they put in the full amount of work for the course. So I think it's worked out well for us. I mean, again, our course is an elective. It's not that there's sort of, you must have mastered exactly this material to get on to the next course in the sequence. And if it were like that, we might feel differently, but I think it's worked well.
SPEAKER 1: OK. Well, I think we can wrap up now. I'd like to thank the five panelists very much for--
[INAUDIBLE] over 100 people. Thank you very much.
We've received your request
You will be notified by email when the transcript and captions are available. The process may take up to 5 business days. Please contact email@example.com if you have any questions about this request.
A panel of five faculty members and academic advisers spoke about ways that students can broaden their academic experiences, Jan. 31, 2017 at a faculty forum organized by the Dean of the University Faculty and Vice Provost for Undergraduate Education. Panelists: Catherine Appert, Department of Music; Bonnie Comella, Director of Undergraduate Advising, Arts and Sciences; Mark Cruvellier, Department of Architecture; Anna Haskins, Department of Sociology; and Jon Kleinberg, Departments of Computer Science and Information Science.