Physics 576A/Chemistry 560B Course Requirements Spring 2007

Submission Format:

• An electronic submission site has be created where you may submit your  reports.  Admissible formats are text, html source, MSWord and pdf.  You may email your reports to Prof. Olmstead or bring them to class on a memory stick to transfer to her computer if you have difficulties with the site or your files are too big, but the electronic site is preferred.
  
• "Less than or equal to 3 pages" is defined in the standard NSF grant manner -- at least 2.5 cm margins, no more than 6 lines/2.5 cm vertically or 15 characters/2.5 cm horizontally (i.e., ≥10 point type).  You may include one extra page for figures and/or references and bibliography.

Written products (details include in-class requirements as well):

• Class Participation (details)  [20 pts total]
  
• short questions on WebQ based on each class period
[due within a week of each presentation; submitted on web-based form through the syllabus web page]
• Class Presentation  (details)  [40 pts total]
• ≤ one-page summary or abstract of the presentation, to be posted on the course web page, submitted as a group.  The summary should include the main references used for the presentation and any readings for the class to complete or browse before the presentation.
  
[due one week before the presentation; electronic submission]

• copy of viewgraphs, powerpoint file, or other materials used in presentation, submitted as a group
[due by June 5; electronic submission]
• three page report on the portion of the class presentation for which you are responsible, submitted individually.  Groups should divide the topic among themselves for the information to be summarized in the reports.
[due by June 5; electronic or hard-copy submission]
• Two Short Reports (each maximum three pages in length) (details)  [20 pts each]
  

• Report on nanotechnology product

  [due June 1, earlier submission encouraged;  electronic submission]
  

• Report on either of the following:

• report on current literature by one of our speakers
  [Due Friday, June 1, earlier submission encouraged;  electronic submission]
  
• report on nanotechnology-related seminar presentation
  [Due Friday, June 1, earlier submission encouraged -- in general, it is recommended you write the report within one week of the seminar; electronic submission]
  

Class Participation (20 points total)

• Participation in class discussions
• Completion of web-based questions on outside presentations (by UW faculty and staff)
• Completion of web-based evaluations of student presentations (by other class members -- not your own)
  

Your class participation should follow from the readings and presentations. You are expected to complete assigned reading(s) before each class. Participation that is grounded on the readings -- whether reporting on them or critically assessing them against other knowledge you have or your own experiences -- will be considered of a high quality.

After each class led by UW faculty and staff, a web-based questionnaire will be available.  These will contain at a minimum  some basic questions general to all presentations, and often 1-2 questions by the speaker that may be answered from the material presented in class or from the readings.  If you miss a presentation, you should still do the readings and answer the questions based on the readings.

The WebQ's will be available for one week after each presentation.

As part of your class participation you will evaluate each student presentation other than your own.   This form is to be submitted through the web page by the Monday following the presentation. (Because your classmates’ grades are affected by this rating, no delays are possible. If you miss a class presentation, turn in an evaluation of the readings.)  Giving the same rating to all criteria and/or all respondents does not qualify as a fair or thoughtful evaluation.

Class presentation (40 points total)

Students must agree among themselves about the division of labor for all of the steps below since 1/2 of your grade on class presentation will be graded jointly with your co-presenters.  If after reaching this agreement difficulties arise, please communicate with the instructor before the graded activities (writing of the abstract and list of readings, presentation) are due.  If you wish separate evaluations and grading of your oral presentation, this must be communicated before your presentation.

One half of your grade (20 pts) for the presentation will be based on the group activities:  your in class presentation, as evaluated by both your peers and the instructor, abstract and choice of assigned readings.  The other half is based on your summary report.

Because many students have never made a class presentation, the steps are detailed under four headings: preparation, mechanics in preparation for the presentation, presentation, and summary of the presentation. You should keep in mind the evaluation form of the presentation as you prepare each of the steps below.

PREPARATION

2.  Decide on partition of labor within your group.  Meet as a group to define the topic and subdivide the effort.  Set definite times for meetings and deadlines for preparing parts of the presentation.

3. Find background material. Start with a computer library search.  Review reference lists of materials assigned by guest speakers -- these may lead you to other references. You may also consult with the instructor.

4. Consult with the instructor about the approach you want to take and the readings that you want to include in your presentation and assign for students to read before class.

5. Select the bibliography. The reading(s) should be selected because of centrality to the issue and to the approach that you want to pursue, it should serve to frame your presentation. Readings need not be in agreement with each other, when this is the case you must address in your presentation these disagreements or discrepancies. Supplemental readings may be selected to clarify, expand, challenge, etc. the core reading(s).  Determine which material should be read by the entire class before your presentation.

6. Decide on the format of the presentation. Presentations can follow any format: lecture, conference-style with a poster or overheads, demonstrations, video, etc. Do what feels most appropriate to the task; feel free to consult with the instructor about this.

7. Prepare the one-page abstract of the presentation. Describe your presentation in less than 200 words.  You should include the major topics to be discussed and enough information to guide the class as they read the assigned material before your presentation.  This abstract, to be submitted electronically, is due one week before the presentation and will be posted on the class web page.

8. Prepare the list of assigned readings. The list of readings should be prepared in American Institute of Physics Journal style. For each reading, include a one sentence summary of what the students should concentrate on in the reading.  The list should be included in the abstract, submitted electronically one week before the presentation and will be posted on the class web page.

ONE WEEK BEFORE THE PRESENTATION

PRESENTATION

1. Introduction. Each presentation should begin with an introduction of the topic. A rationale/context should be provided for the choice of the readings.

2.  Main Body of Presentation.

• Format You are free to format the presentation in any way you feel is most effective.  You may have a single student present the entire report, or divide the time among yourselves.  Regardless of the format that you choose, the content of the presentation should cover the items listed in the next bullet.

• Content. Address all of the following:
• a description of the science underlying the lecture topic.
  
• a description of the applications of this science to your chosen topic area
  
• a description of the possible societal and/or ethical impact of this phenomenon.
  

3. Class Discussion. Facilitate all students’ participation. Be sure to pay attention to all students’ contributions. If someone has not participated you may want to be particularly encouraging of their participation.  Answer questions clearly and succinctly.

MONDAY FOLLOWING PRESENTATION:  SUMMARY REPORT (20 points)

Your report should summarize the presentation and the conclusions you reached, making reference to the assigned readings and other literature.  You may also note any substantial points raised during the class discussion. The abstract you submitted may serve as an outline to use for this summary. Attach to this summary copies of any handouts or slides that you used if they have not previously been submitted as a group.

Short reports [20 points each]

Report 1.  Report on Nanotechnology Product

    [topic due Tuesday May 22; report due Friday, June 1 (last day of classes)]

• a description of the science underlying the application.
• a description of how nanotechnology impacts this product or application
• how was the product developed?  how is it made?
  
• estimates of how this product is/will be used; how large is the market
• what are the long/short term impacts on society of this product.
• What problems might there be with disposal of this product after its useful life? Does "nano" make these problems better or worse?
  

Report 2.  One of the following:  Summary of Seminar or Colloquium Presentation OR Summary of Current Literature Article.

Summary of Seminar or Colloquium Presentation
[It is suggested you clear the seminar with Prof. Olmstead before beginning your report; Preferably turned in within 1 week of the seminar you attend, but June 1 at the latest.]

• Title, Time, Place and Venue of talk
• Full name and affiliation of speaker
• The focus ("take-home message") of the presentation
  
• Summary of the essential information in their presentation
• Methods used in collecting (or generating) the information presented.
• Major results and conclusions of the presentation.
  
• Brief Critique of material presented -- did the results support the conclusions?  were the experiments or calculations complete?  where does the presentation fall on the relevant scale of good science/clever engineering/broad impact?
• Brief Critique of the way in which the material was presented -- was it accessible to someone with your background?  was the material presented clearly and logically?
• Question for the speaker, and the speaker's answer.  Your question should demonstrate some knowledge or curiosity about the results, and require a more than few word answer (for example -- Don't ask, "At which temperature did you grow your samples?"  A somewhat better question is "If you increase the temperature, in which way do you expect the results of your experiment to change?"  Still better is "I would think that increasing the diffusion rate during deposition by increasing the deposition temperature should increase the spacing between your nanodots.  Is that a viable solution to the problem of cross-talk that you presented?  Why or why not?"

Report on Current Literature from UW
    [topic (citation) due Tuesday May 23; report due Friday June 1 (last day of classes)]

• Full Citation (Title, Authors, Author Affiliation, Journal, Page and Volume, Year)
• A summary of the major results of the paper, in your OWN words -- DON'T just rephrase the abstract, but describe the methodology (how they grew and characterized samples or did their calculation), major result(s), and conclusions.
• A brief summary of how the paper fits into current knowledge -- this will include reading through a couple of the main references in the paper.  If the paper is more than a few months old, you should also check the Web of Science Citation Index for papers that cite the paper you chose.
• A suggestion of a follow-up experiment or calculation to test or utilize the conclusions of the paper.
  
• A referee report on the paper, for example using the Physical Review Letters Referee Report Form.  You are welcome to use the report form for the journal your paper is from (in general available through the journal's web page), if the PRL form doesn't seem appropriate.  Note that even though the paper you are reporting on has already made it into print does not necessarily mean that there aren't still mistakes or unclear parts.  You can also just fully praise the article if you think it is really excellent. 
  
• Please attach a copy of the article to your report if it is not readily available electronically.  If it is available, please give the web link or attach a pdf.