SD Science Junction

*** College lectures archaic practice left over from Gutenberg Press days

I have sat through perhaps thousands of University course lectures and wondered since the first day if there couldn't be a better way to do this.  A professor or graduate assistant standing at the front of the room droning on with information that does not relate in a useful way to text material is something left over from 100s of  years ago when books were very scarce and very expensive.  That is not the case now and has not been for many years.

Right now (noon to 1PM, Jan 4, 2012) SDPB-Radio is running a program from American Radio Works titled "Don't Lecture Me".  The gist of it suggests that science and math lecture instruction is currently very ineffective uses of professors' and students' time. 

College instruction which is aimed primarily at sorting out unworthies such as that at SDSM&T prevents serious consideration of alternate instruction systems which might not waste the time and lives of 2/3 of the students who start at SDSM&T. 

If you want to get an idea of how science instruction/education must be changed if the US is not to languish in Science and technology becoming the equivalent of a third-world science country, listen to  "Don't Lecture Me". 

Systems based on scarcities of year 1440, do not make sense in 2012 and haven't made sense for many years.  Faculty administrators and professors have a cushy familiar system which benefits them primarily and their students only secondarily or thirdly or worsely {I know, but as my daughter used to say, "It could have been wuss, mommy.").

The South Dakota Board of Regents is failing nearly completely to seriously consider the time and resources of students.  The whole South Dakotahigher education system needs very fundamental re-working based on how humans actually learn.  But, don't hold your breath, this should have been obvious nearly 100 years ago.

by Doug Wiken opinion based Public Radio and enduring a score of years listening to lectures.

 

*** Exploit Ethanol advantages in engines designed for the high Octane Fuel

I suspect every real scientist is aware of the advantages of ethanol as a fuel, but also the disadvantage that by weight, ethanol has only about 66% as much energy as does gasoline. Alcohol does have the advantage of a 100 Octane however and that allows higher compression engines and relatively high turbo boost pressures.

Recently on Dakota Midday at SDPB-Radio, "Bob" the Caller, made it seem that ethanol was some kind of devil's plot because he could not run it in his old motorcycles or if he did he got reduced mileages.  He kept ranting until it appeared he was saying that ethanol had negative energy since he claimed more gasoline would be needed with the more alcohol used.  This is total nonsense even if alcohol used with lower compression ratios has only 66% of the energy of gasoline.

Yesterday, I read an article in CAR AND DRIVER titled too cutely "Driving under the Influence".  Even so, it has interesting information and history.  Take a look at an image of the page below.  Click on it for a larger version.

Click for larger more readable version.  Sized to print well on lettersize paper.

We in South Dakota already produce ethanol, and can produce methanol using our stranded wind energy.  Research and development or intelligent tinkering with existing engines to run optimally with alcohol would seem to be in the interests of the South Dakota economic development.  SDSM&T Mechanical Engineering and Chemistry Departments and the same at SDSU might think about some research projects for students using the ideas suggested in the CAR AND DRIVER article.  Get Car and Driver

-------- Written by Doug Wiken with information from Car and Driver Magazine.

Fund both research on science and engineering, but also on teaching these courses effectively

At the same time we are hearing calls for balancing the US budget by slashing the budget for research and education, a lot of magazines are ending the year with reports on the top 50 inventions, science developments, etc. Some great ideas come from people with no formal engineering or science experience, but most require advanced study. The complexity of modern devices, computers, communications, medicine, biology, botany, cancer research, genetics research, etc all require years of preparation.

The position of the US in the world literally depends on greatly increased research rather than on reducing government aid for research. Some government money never produces anything obviously, but it may also almost never be obvious at the start of research whether it will result in just another needless consumer gadget or become the basis for whole new industries and profit centers which then can and should be taxed.

Anybody watching something besides Fox News and reading more than TEA “Party” propaganda will be aware of the current concern for lagging US science and math education and research. The sheer number of researchers and scientists in India and China by themselves requires the US do a much better job of science education by funding better teaching at both K-12 levels, but also in colleges and universities as well as research at those institutions..both in the sciences themselves, but also in best methods of instruction which don't grossly waste student's time and resources.

The education of scientists and engineers will fall far short of needs if professors intent on research consider students only as necessary evils who don’t warrant maintaining published office hours or worth consultation…or even good teaching or relevant fair testing.. let alone providing relevant relations to current engineering and science questions and work.

--- Doug Wiken...still looking for others to add relevant posts here.