12:30 BillyJudd 360-878-9970
phone & email
12:45 Kaitlyn Frasier
(360) 556-1040
1:00 JackSharpe
(206)-473-9585
maptaindecaptain@gmail.com
1:15 julian putnam
[303-817-6817] putjul17@evergreen.edu
1:30 Connor Abdelnoor
011-(65)-64664427
abdcon02@evergreen.ed
1:45 Teal Hobson-Lowther
405-694-5899 hobtea26@evergreen.edu
2:00 Dylan MacKenzie
2:00 (360) 413-0402
2:15 Jax Johnson - SciSem
360 528 9639 myconasc@gmail.com
-- 2:45 mollydeming mollydeming.me@live.com
-360.785.4576
-- 3:00 Kirana Bergstrom
-206.794.5063, berkir23@evergreen.edu
-- 3:15 Emily Lubar ?
--
Phone: 3035134587
-- 3:30 Emily Lubar ?
-gmail: emily.lubar27@gmail.com
-- 3:45 Victoria Zoller
--
victoriazoller@gmail.com
-- 4:00 Alex Chaney
-(360) 561-5928 alexchaney@earthlink.net
-- 4:15 Andrew Kolberg 360-791-0783
-awkolberg@gmail.com
-- 4:30 Anna Bowen
-bowann16@evergreen.edu 1-206-734-7684
Student Last and First Name: Andrew Kolberg 505-366-8153
Wrote essays off schedule with team - Kirana Bergstrom and Teal - only nice feedback – somewhat
more constructive facte-to-face
Program, Course or Contract Title: MMP: Science Seminar
Quarter and Academic Year: Winter 2013
Faculty: E.J. Zita, PhD, Physics
DESCRIPTION:
EVALUATION:
Andrew participated quietly in some seminars. He did not complete a final survey or submit required endof-quarter information. He wrote an essay or two, out of synch with his team, and gave little feedback on
their essays. It is difficult to evaluate his understanding or growth in this program.
Peers valued Andrew’s contributions to their teamwork, though it was sometimes incomplete. “Andrew
Kolberg was always there for meetings, and was professional about it. He rarely gave feedback on
essays. He contributed to my learning through discussion of texts and PIQs.”
“Andrew Kolberg: Came to every meeting. He was prepared, having taken notes. He had helpful and
interesting PIQs. He contributed to most work except for the essays. He did not give feedback to my
papers. He helped us prepare for everything else though. I would like to work with him again, meeting
times were fun and interesting.”
“Andrew was always present during meetings and always prepared. He was also always really invested
and interested in the readings, he always brought up a lot of good points and had really interesting
insights, he is a very careful reader and often would want to talk about things that I hadn't given much
though over, but I found out that I really didn't understand well enough and should have taken more time
on. We did not post essays during the same weeks, so we didn't really give each other feedback. But he
was also really an awesome team member, he and Teal were really interesting to listen to talk about
crazy physics ideas.”
I wish Andrew the best in his future work.
EQUIVALENCIES:
TOTAL CREDITS EARNED: 3
2 – introduction to modern physics & cosmology (qualitative)
2 – seminar on scientific methods, astrophysics, and climate change
Thursday 20 March 2013 Draft – EJZ
Connor Abdelnoor:
I emailed you but here:
Nicola-Worthless (CA)
Micah- Good teammate when actually participating (CA)
. I'm just emailing you about my group members, Nicola Leonardi and Micah Stringham.
I got together with them at the beginning of the quarter and we did the first reading together but it went
downhill from there. I don't think Nicola has ever talked to me about a PIQ and Micah dropped off after the
2nd week. During our mid quarter evals, John advised me to join another group since I was the only one
in mine participating and had nobody to discuss the readings with outside of seminar. I was about to
switch when Micah got in contact with me and said he wanted to start being serious about seminar. We
worked together for three weeks, but the physics in MMP drained him of life and he hasn't been to class
recently. I figured it wasn't worth finding another group for the last two readings so I just finished off my
PIQ's and essays by myself. That is why I haven't had the three P's I's and Q's that every other group
posts every week. (CA)
Another matter I needed to email you about was my final short conference. I am leaving early spring
break, however; im still interested in having that conference if you can find a time for me before this
friday. I understand if this is too inconvenient.
Thanks for a great quarter of seminar,
Connor Abdelnoor
Connor Abdelnoor
With starry eyes, we look to the cosmos for answers about the beginning of time. Back on planet Earth,
draught, starvation, decreasing water tables, and increasing temperatures are running rampant. Nine
billion people are projected to be living on the planet by 2050 (Turning down the Heat) and agriculture is
suffering from global warming. “Recent work has begun to link global warming to recent record-breaking
extreme events with some degree of confidence.” (Page 16) The days of denying global warming are over
and now the world is left with the question of how these people going to be fed?
Miles Taylor:
Miles attended some seminars, and participated too little for me to be able to fairly evaluate his
understanding or growth in this program. He wrote one essay (trying to connect coral patterns to the
Fibonacci series) and one set of responses to peers’ essays. He showed up to about half of his team
meetings, and posted about half of their PIQs. He did not turn in a writing sample for this evaluation, nor
his final survey on program concepts, nor a portfolio. He scheduled no evaluation conference.
Miles’ teammates valued his contributions when he was present. They wrote “Miles disappeared midway
through the quarter. He stopped coming to both the seminar and Methods, and even quit his job at the
greenery. No one has been able to get in touch with him. Up to the point when he disappeared, though,
he came to all the meetings… when he did he was fully prepared, and a good contributor. In addition, his
points seemed insightful. Midway through the quarter, he disappeared, and I’m still not sure where he is.
If I ever see him again, I would be very happy to work with him.” “Miles Taylor did [his fair share] for most
of the quarter, but seemed to disappear the last two weeks, though only one of actual seminar work.”
Miles wrote no peer evaluations. I wish him the best in his future work. 2 cr
Micah Stringham
Micah attended a few seminars, and participated too little for me to be able to fairly evaluate his
understanding or growth in this program. He posted two essays, one reflection and rewrite, and two
responses to peers’ essays, too brief to be helpful. Micah turned in neither his final survey on program
concepts, nor a portfolio. He scheduled no evaluation conference.
Micah did not turn in a writing sample for this evaluation. Digging through Moodle, I find that his essays
could have greatly benefited from reading essay guidelines, reflecting on feedback from colleagues, and
thoughtful rewriting. Micah’s essays betray incomplete reading and difficulty understanding. Meeting and
discussing with his teammates, and participating fully in classes, could have helped Micah learn more.
He did rewrite his second essay, but fundamental confusions persisted. I could not discern between
Micah’s speculations and possible connections to or conflations of uncited sources.
Micah’s teammate generously wrote that he was a “Good teammate when actually participating …
[We] got together … at the beginning of the quarter and we did the first reading together but it went
downhill from there. Micah dropped off after the 2nd week. During our mid quarter evals, John advised
me to join another group since I was the only one in mine participating and had nobody to discuss the
readings with outside of seminar. I was about to switch when Micah got in contact with me and said he
wanted to start being serious about seminar. We worked together for three weeks, but … he hasn't been
to class recently. I figured it wasn't worth finding another group for the last two readings so I just finished
off my PIQ's and essays by myself.”
Micah wrote no peer evaluations. I wish him the best in his future work. 2 cr
Student Last and First Name: Jennifer Rosenberg
Program, Course or Contract Title: MMP: Science Seminar
Quarter and Academic Year: Winter 2013
Faculty: E.J. Zita, PhD, Physics
DESCRIPTION:
EVALUATION:
Jen participated actively and attended most classes, even some optional Tuesday sessions. She always
showed interest in learning, and made some good contributions in seminars. Jen posted half her essays
and all of her responses to peers’ essays on time. Jen showed some understanding on our final survey
on key program concepts, and some gaps. Jen did not provide an example of her best writing. I
encourage her to take advantage of every opportunity to improve her writing skills.
Peers generally valued Jen’s contributions to their teamwork. They wrote: “Jen missed a few PIQ
sessions, though she said she was ill so it of course is forgivable. She also brought annotated texts, but
was better about knowing where her notes were. Questions were her strong point, though sometimes
they were explicitly answered by the article, it still got us hunting and talking. She also gave interesting
feed back on my papers, and I would like to work with here again. “
“Jen was sick a couple of times, but was generally punctual and engaged. [She was] very friendly, and
easy to work with.”
Jen also wrote thoughtful evaluations of her teammates. I wish Jen the best in her future work
EQUIVALENCIES:
TOTAL CREDITS EARNED: 4
2 – introduction to modern physics & cosmology (qualitative)
2 – seminar on scientific methods, astrophysics, and climate change
Thursday 20 March 2013 Draft – EJZ
Shawn Lance (met Julian Putnam online each week)
Shawn is very intelligent and insightful. I would love to collaborate with him again in the future.
Even though the veins are more or less 2-dimensional they basically follow the same pattern as the 3dimensional branches. “There are, in other words, forces guiding appearances that run deeper than those
that govern life.”(pg. 4) Which makes sense as a tree will grow towards the light and become further from
its predestined appearance.
https://moodle.evergreen.edu/mod/forum/discuss.php?d=154305