DOCSLIB.ORG

Department of English Self-Study, 2009-2010

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Department of English Self-Study, 2009-2010 Thomas Harriot College of Arts and Sciences Department of English Self-Study, 2009-2010 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION ........................................................................................................................................... 3 1.1 EXACT TITLE(S) OF UNIT PROGRAMS: ........................................................................................................................... 3 1.2 DEPARTMENT OR INTERDISCIPLINARY GROUP AUTHORIZED TO OFFER DEGREE PROGRAM(S): ................................................. 3 1.3 EXACT TITLE(S) OF DEGREES GRANTED: ......................................................................................................................... 3 1.4 COLLEGE OR SCHOOL: ............................................................................................................................................... 3 1.5 BRIEF HISTORY AND MISSION: .................................................................................................................................... 3 1.6 RELATIONSHIP OF THE PROGRAM TO UNC’S STRATEGIC GOALS AND TO THE ECU MISSION AND TO ECU’S STRATEGIC DIRECTIONS: ................................................................................................................................................................................... 5 1.7 DEGREE PROGRAM OBJECTIVES, OUTCOMES AND UNIQUENESS: ....................................................................................... 7 1.8. PROGRAM ENRICHMENT OPPORTUNITIES:.................................................................................................................. 10 1.9 RESPONSIVENESS TO LOCAL AND NATIONAL NEEDS: ...................................................................................................... 21 1.10 PROGRAM QUALITY: ............................................................................................................................................. 24 1.11 ADMINISTRATION: ................................................................................................................................................ 27 II. CURRICULUM/INSTRUCTION .................................................................................................................................. 35 2.1 FOUNDATION CURRICULUM:..................................................................................................................................... 35 2.2 INSTRUCTIONAL RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER PROGRAMS: .................................................................................................. 37 2.3 CURRICULUM ASSESSMENT AND CURRICULAR CHANGES: ............................................................................................... 39 2.4 BACHELOR’S DEGREE: ............................................................................................................................................. 48 2.5 CERTIFICATE PROGRAMS: ......................................................................................................................................... 50 2.6 MASTER'S DEGREE: ................................................................................................................................................ 51 2.7 DOCTORAL DEGREE: ............................................................................................................................................... 52 III. STUDENTS............................................................................................................................................................... 54 3.1 ENROLLMENT: ....................................................................................................................................................... 54 3.2 QUALITY OF INCOMING STUDENTS: ............................................................................................................................ 56 3.3 QUALITY OF CURRENT/ONGOING STUDENTS: .............................................................................................................. 58 3.4 DEGREES GRANTED:................................................................................................................................................ 60 3.5 DIVERSITY OF STUDENT POPULATION: ........................................................................................................................ 61 3.6 NEED/PLACEMENT: ................................................................................................................................................ 62 3.7 FUNDING: ............................................................................................................................................................. 63 3.8 STUDENT INVOLVEMENT IN THE INSTRUCTIONAL PROCESS: ............................................................................................. 66 3.9 PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES:........................................................................................................... 68 IV. FACULTY ................................................................................................................................................................. 69 4.1 FACULTY LIST AND CURRICULA VITA: .......................................................................................................................... 69 4.2 FACULTY PROFILE SUMMARY: ................................................................................................................................... 69 4.3 VISITING, PART-TIME AND OTHER FACULTY: ................................................................................................................ 73 4.4 ADVISING:............................................................................................................................................................. 73 4.5 FACULTY QUALITY: ................................................................................................................................................. 73 V. RESOURCES ............................................................................................................................................................. 78 1 | Page 5.1 BUDGET:............................................................................................................................................................... 78 5.2 SPACE: ................................................................................................................................................................. 83 5.3 TECHNICAL/EQUIPMENT SUPPORT: ............................................................................................................................ 83 5.4 LIBRARY SUPPORT:.................................................................................................................................................. 84 VI. ASSESSMENT OF OUTCOMES/FACULTY EXPECTATIONS ...................................................................................... 85 6.1 WHAT ARE THE UNIT PROGRAM VALUES OF THE FACULTY, THAT IS, THE KNOWLEDGE, SKILLS, AND OTHER ATTRIBUTES FACULTY EXPECT THEIR GRADUATES TO ATTAIN? ............................................................................................................................. 85 6.2 HOW WELL IS THE PROGRAM ACHIEVING FACULTY EXPECTATIONS? .................................................................................. 88 6.3 WHAT CHANGES SHOULD BE MADE IN THE PROGRAM SO THAT IT CAN BETTER ACHIEVE FACULTY EXPECTATIONS? WHAT ONGOING PROCESS DOES THE UNIT UTILIZE TO PROMOTE QUALITY ENHANCEMENT? ................................................................................ 88 6.4 ASSESSMENT REPORTS........................................................................................................................................... 89 VII. CURRENT RESEARCH/CREATIVE ACTIVITY ........................................................................................................... 91 7.1 CURRENT RESEARCH/CREATIVE ACTIVITY: ................................................................................................................... 91 7.2 NATIONAL COMPARISON: ........................................................................................................................................ 96 7.3 INTERDISCIPLINARY PROJECTS: .................................................................................................................................. 97 7.4 EXTERNAL RESEARCH/CREATIVE ACTIVITY SUPPORT: ................................................................................................... 100 7.5 RESEARCH DEVELOPMENT: ..................................................................................................................................... 101 7.6 ETHICS TRAINING: ................................................................................................................................................ 102 VIII. SERVICE/OUTREACH .......................................................................................................................................... 103 8.1 CONSULTING: ...................................................................................................................................................... 103 8.2 COMMUNITY SERVICE/ENGAGEMENT: ...................................................................................................................... 103 8.3 STUDENT INVOLVEMENT IN COMMUNITY
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Thomas Harriot: Father of Modern Notation
    Biddix 1 THOMAS HARRIOT: FATHER OF MODERN NOTATION A RESEARCH PAPER SUBMITTED TO DR. SLOAN DESPEAUX DEPARTMENT OF MATHEMATICS WESTERN CAROLINA UNIVERSITY BY LAYLA BIDDIX Biddix 2 Students learn mathematical symbolism early in their education. Any third grader can convey with ease the meanings of “+”, “-“, “=”, “<”, and “>” when asked about these symbols. However, these same students are rarely ever taught the origins of the symbols that they utilize with nearly every mathematical equation that they encounter. Most of these students will never be taught that several of these symbols were created and used by mathematician and astronomer Thomas Harriot. Although little is known of Thomas Harriot, his influence on mathematics is prevalent even at the most basic levels of mathematical manipulations. There exist many suggestions for why Harriot created symbols for his mathematical works, but no concrete reasoning for why Harriot began using symbolism in his mathematics is known. The mixed reaction from his mathematic colleagues and the fact that Harriot did the majority of his work in the early 1600s without the use of a printing press, make it extraordinary that many of the symbols Harriot utilized and the notation in which he wrote in his mathematical manuscripts are still in use today. Harriot always had a knack for symbolism. Harriot’s work with symbolism began with his creation of his own alphabet based on the Algonquian language.1 After spending time and forming a friendship with an Algonquian Indian that some of Harriot’s friends had kidnapped from what is now known as North Carolina, he began writing a language based on what he learned from his new Indian friend.2 This new language included a branch of mathematics, in which he represented powers and roots using cossic or algebraic numbers.
    [Show full text]
  • Thomas Harriot the Discovery of Refraction
    STEP-BY-STEP LANGUAGE INSTITUTE (84) (28) 6292-8721 https://stepbystepcorp.com Thomas Harriot The Discovery of Refraction A. When light travels from one medium to another, it generally bends, or refracts. The law of refraction gives us a way of predicting the amount of bending. Refraction has many applications in optics and technology. A lens uses refraction to form an image of an object for many different purposes, such as magnification. A prism uses refraction to form a spectrum of colors from an incident beam of light. Refraction also plays an important role in the formation of a mirage and other optical illusions. The law of refraction is also known as Snell’s Law, named after Willobrord Snell, who discovered the law in 1621. Although Snell’s sine law of refraction is now taught routinely in undergraduate courses, the quest for it spanned many centuries and involved many celebrated scientists. Perhaps the most interesting thing is that the first discovery of the sine law, made by the sixteenth-century English scientist Thomas Harriot (1560-1621), has been almost completely overlooked by physicists, despite much published material describing his contribution. B. A contemporary of Shakespeare, Elizabeth I, Johannes Kepler and Galilei Galileo, Thomas Harriot (1560-1621) was an English scientist and mathematician. His principal biographer, J.W. Shirley, was quoted saying that in his time he was “England’s most profound mathematician, most imaginative and methodical experimental scientist”. As a mathematician, he contributed to the development of algebra, and introduced the symbols of “>” and “<“ for “more than” and “less than.” He also studied navigation and astronomy.
    [Show full text]
  • Science and Patronage in Early Modern England – a Preliminary Study
    Stephen Pumfrey scipat.doc Last printed: 7.7.04 3:24 PM p. 1 Science and patronage in early modern England – a preliminary study. Stephen Pumfrey and Frances Dawbarn (University of Lancaster, U.K.) (Currently copyright of the authors. Not to be cited without permission. A version to be published in History of Science vol. 41 [1993]).) 1. Introduction. In the last fifteen years our understanding of the development of late Renaissance and early modern science has been transformed by the application of patronage studies to the production of natural knowledge. As historians of other forms of cultural production, from high art to popular theatre, from confessional apologetics to country houses, had long been aware, patronage was ubiquitous in sixteenth and seventeenth century Europe.1 Courtly, aristocratic, ecclesiastical and, increasingly, mercantile patrons provided most of the positions for men (and some women) with intellectual and practical skills but limited socio-economic autonomy. These clients’ careers, the cultural and material goods they produced, even the nature of the professions they pursued, depended upon the complex sets of interests that structured the field of patron-client relations. Such also was the dependence of most English makers of natural knowledge during the period of this study, 1570-1625. It was especially true of those working outside universities, ranging from elevated court physicians and philosophers through projectors and private tutors to more humble mathematical and mechanical practitioners. The sociological turn in the history of science transformed the significance of patronage. If the disciplinary frameworks, material practices and intellectual content of forms of natural knowledge were strongly shaped by the cultural and institutional contexts in which they were developed then, potentially, early modern systems of patronage not only sustained but also 1 There is an extensive literature on patronage other than of natural knowledge.
    [Show full text]
  • England's Galileo
    SPRING BOOKS COMMENT string theory including Michael Green HISTORY and John Schwarz, were probing its mathematical boundaries. Whether the mathematical approach eventually became too dominant, taking England’s Galileo over in terms of academic recognition and funding, is the crux of much of Georgina Ferry relishes a biography of the formidable today’s debate. Farmelo gives a lively Moon-mapping Tudor scientist Thomas Harriot. description of the back-and-forth of con- tributions typical of any thriving inter- disciplinary area, with physical problems he phrase ‘publish or perish’ came into Thomas Harriot: A of the Algonquian peo- stimulating mathematical breakthroughs use in the twentieth century to encap- Life in Science ple, and of the region’s and mathematics throwing up new sulate academic pressures. It is also a ROBYN ARIANRHOD natural resources and Oxford University Press insights and techniques in physics. He Tlesson from the life of Thomas Harriot, who climate. Arianrhod (2019) steers clear of discussing the infeasibly lived when there were no academic journals, shows that his interest large ‘string landscape’ of possible physi- and who never taught at a university. in local people was far from typical: he learnt cal theories to which the mathematical A contemporary of William Shakespeare, their language, admired how they inter- approach seems to have led — contrary Harriot was an English mathematician, planted beans, squashes and maize (corn), to hopes of a unique ‘theory of eve- astronomer and natural philosopher whose and respected their religion. Meanwhile, the rything’. Instead, he concentrates on original work bears comparison with that military expedition leaders fatally soured developments more directly useful and of Johannes Kepler and Galileo Galilei.
    [Show full text]
  • Thomas Harriot on the Coinage of England LSE Research Online URL for This Paper: Version: Published Version
    Thomas Harriot on the coinage of England LSE Research Online URL for this paper: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/100503/ Version: Published Version Article: Biggs, Norman (2019) Thomas Harriot on the coinage of England. Archive for History of Exact Sciences, 73 (4). pp. 361-383. ISSN 0003-9519 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00407-019-00228-w Reuse This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) licence. This licence allows you to distribute, remix, tweak, and build upon the work, even commercially, as long as you credit the authors for the original work. More information and the full terms of the licence here: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/ [email protected] https://eprints.lse.ac.uk/ Archive for History of Exact Sciences https://doi.org/10.1007/s00407-019-00228-w Thomas Harriot on the coinage of England Norman Biggs1 Received: 12 April 2019 © The Author(s) 2019 Abstract Thomas Harriot was the finest English mathematician before Isaac Newton, but his work on the coinage of his country is almost unknown, unlike Newton’s. In the early 1600s Harriot studied several aspects of the gold and silver coins of his time. He investigated the ratio between the values of gold and silver, using data derived from the official weights of the coins; he used hydrostatic weighing to determine the com- position of the coins; and he studied the methods used to calculate how metals should be combined in order to produce the required standard of purity. This work required not only arithmetical skill, but also great insight into the relationships between the various quantities, and here his ‘greate invention of algebra’ played its part.
    [Show full text]
  • Birth of a Colony North Carolina Guide for Educators Act III—The Roanoke
    Birth of a Colony North Carolina Guide for Educators Act III—The Roanoke Voyages, 1584–1590 Birth of a Colony Guide for Educators Birth of a Colony explores the history of North Carolina from the time of European exploration through the Tuscarora War. Presented in five acts, the video combines primary sources and expert commentary to bring this period of our history to life. Use this study guide to enhance students’ understanding of the ideas and information presented in the video. The guide is organized according to the video’s five acts. Included for each act are a synopsis, a vocabulary list, discussion questions, and lesson plans. Going over the vocabulary with students before watching the video will help them better understand the film’s content. Discussion questions will encourage students to think critically about what they have viewed. Lesson plans extend the subject matter, providing more information or opportunity for reflection. The lesson plans follow the new Standard Course of Study framework that takes effect with the 2012–2013 school year. With some adjustments, most of the questions and activities can be adapted for the viewing audience. Birth of a Colony was developed by the North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources, in collaboration with UNC-TV and Horizon Productions. More resources are available at the website http://www.unctv.org/birthofacolony/index.php. 2 Act III—The Roanoke Voyages, 1584–1590 Act III of Birth of a Colony presents the story of England’s attempts to settle in the New World. Queen Elizabeth enlisted Sir Walter Raleigh to launch an expedition “to inhabit and possess” any lands not already claimed by Spain or France.
    [Show full text]
  • THOMAS HARRIOT (1560 – July 2, 1621) by HEINZ KLAUS STRICK, Germany
    THOMAS HARRIOT (1560 – July 2, 1621) by HEINZ KLAUS STRICK, Germany The only thing known about THOMAS HARRIOT, who enrolled at Oxford University at the age of 17, is that he came from a humble background (his father was called plebeian). In 1580 he took his bachelor's exam and went to London. There he joined WALTER RALEIGH in 1583, who had contributed to the subjugation of Ireland as leader of an English company and since then had worked as an advisor to Queen ELIZABETH I's court. RALEIGH, knighted by the Queen in 1585, had the ambitious goal of founding colonies in the New World. (drawings © Andreas Strick) HARRIOT was his most important employee in the preparation of the expeditions: his duties included training the captains and officers in the latest navigation techniques, the optimal design and equipment of the ships, the selection of the seafarers and, last but not least, the dealing with the accounts of the project. During this time, HARRIOT wrote a (lost) manuscript, which described, among other things, how latitude could be determined from the positions of the sun and the North Star. The settlement of Roanoke Island (located in today's North Carolina) founded on the first expedition had to be abandoned the following year. It is not certain whether HARRIOT himself took part in this expedition. From a second expedition he brought extensive notes on the language and habits of the indigenous people. In his report, he recommended the importation of tobacco that he got to know on site. It took decades before a colony was founded, because initially Spanish warships could prevent permanent settlement.
    [Show full text]
  • Thomas Harriot: a Lost Pioneer
    Thomas Harriot: A lost pioneer © 1997−2009, Millennium Mathematics Project, University of Cambridge. Permission is granted to print and copy this page on paper for non−commercial use. For other uses, including electronic redistribution, please contact us. March 2009 Features Thomas Harriot: A lost pioneer by Anna Faherty It's International Year of Astronomy and all eyes are on Galileo Galilei, whose astronomical observations 400 years ago revolutionised our understanding of the Universe. But few people know that Galileo wasn't the first to build a telescope and turn it on the stars. That honour falls to a little−known mathematician called Thomas Harriot, who might have become a household name, had he bothered to publish his results. This article is a tour of his work. Thomas Harriot: A lost pioneer 1 Thomas Harriot: A lost pioneer This portrait was once believed to be of Thomas Harriot, but modern evidence indicates that it is probably not him. When the prestigious Royal Society was established in 1660, it quickly launched a seven year search for the lost papers of Thomas Harriot, a London mathematician and empirical scientist who had died decades before. The quest failed, but when the papers finally came to light a century later, they included a system of symbolic algebra, workable binary numbers, the sine law of refraction and detailed telescopic observations of the Moon and sunspots: all mathematical and scientific firsts. While Harriot's intellectual achievements had been gathering dust, much of his pioneering work was discovered by others, so his name never made it into the history books.
    [Show full text]
  • The Lost Thomas Harriot Chronicles from 1585 --1586
    Raleigh’s 1587 Lost Colony: Conspiracy, Spies, Secrets & Lies Directed Studies in History---Dr. Kenneth Wilburn By Fred Willard June 9 -- 2009 Willard 1 Table of Contents I- Abstract II- Background study of research III- What were Thomas Harriot‟s Chronicles? IV- A perspective regarding Thomas Harriot‟s Brief and True Report V- Have the lost Thomas Harriot Chronicles been found? VI- Breadcrumbs Left On a 50-Mile Trail VII- Conclusion VIII- Appendix I- Abstract The hypothesis for this paper is that the 1587 colony of Sir Walter Ra- leigh resettled 50 miles west from their original settlement on Roanoke Island. This is a research design to test the above hypothesis. It is a quest for “Virgi- nia Dare‟s pinky ring” and the relocated lost city of Raleigh. One of the most intriguing mysteries in North America concerns the fate of the one hundred and sixteen men, women and children dwelling in Sir Wal- ter Raleigh‟s Colony that was seated on the Outer Banks of North Carolina in the summer of 1587. Interest in the fate of the colonists, who disappeared without a trace, has continually grown over the centuries until, attracting both popular and scholarly attention, it came to be universally known as “The Lost Colony”. A long-lost and critical clue that brings us closer to the solution of this enigmatic mystery, which has fascinated all who have become acquainted Willard 2 with it over the last 400 years, may have just been discovered. New research has brought to light documentations implicating Raleigh, his investors, and certain participants of the Roanoke Voyages with complicity in the suppression of information concerning the discovery of natural commo- dities and their location.
    [Show full text]
  • A Second Eden: the Promotion and Perception of Virginia, 1584-1624
    W&M ScholarWorks Dissertations, Theses, and Masters Projects Theses, Dissertations, & Master Projects 2008 A Second Eden: The Promotion and Perception of Virginia, 1584-1624 Jennifer Lynn Blahnik College of William & Mary - Arts & Sciences Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wm.edu/etd Part of the United States History Commons Recommended Citation Blahnik, Jennifer Lynn, "A Second Eden: The Promotion and Perception of Virginia, 1584-1624" (2008). Dissertations, Theses, and Masters Projects. Paper 1539626566. https://dx.doi.org/doi:10.21220/s2-bdna-9q63 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses, Dissertations, & Master Projects at W&M ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations, Theses, and Masters Projects by an authorized administrator of W&M ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. A Second Eden The Promotion and Perception of Virginia, 1584-1624 Jennifer Lynn Blahnik Celebration, Florida Master of Arts, Ohio University, 2003 A Thesis presented to the Graduate Faculty of the College of William and Mary in Candidacy for the Degree of Master of Arts Department of History The College of William and Mary January, 2008 APPROVAL SHEET This thesis is submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts Blahnik Approved by the Committee, June 2007 r. James P. Whittenburg,/td^isor Dr. Kevin P. KrHv O* Dr. Dale E. Hoak ABSTRACT Summertime in Tidewater Virginia is brutal. I learned this unpleasant fact during a summer archeology apprenticeship hunched over what was once an eighteenth century dairy. As I labored under the unrelenting sun, I began to wonder why any English man or woman would settle in such a hostile environment.
    [Show full text]
  • De Morgan Newsletter 2019
    De Morgan Association Newsletter 2019/20 Contents Letter from the Editor ..................................................................................... 3 Letter from the Head of Department .............................................................. 3 British Society Of Rheology Annual Award 2019 ............................................. 5 De Morgan Association Dinner ....................................................................... 6 What Biology Can Do For Maths ..................................................................... 8 4th Floor Opening .......................................................................................... 14 ICDEA 2019 .................................................................................................... 16 Inaugural Lecture – Professor Yiannis Petridis ................................................ 18 Susan Brown Day – International Women’s Day ............................................. 20 STEM for Britain ............................................................................................. 22 April Colloquium 2019 .................................................................................... 24 Wikithon ........................................................................................................ 25 Thomas Harriot - England's leading mathematical scientist before Newton .... 26 Chalkdust ....................................................................................................... 30 Scaling, PDEs and Iceberg Melting .................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Robert Goulding Program of Liberal Studies University of Notre Dame Notre Dame in 46556
    Robert Goulding Program of Liberal Studies University of Notre Dame Notre Dame IN 46556 Education 1999 Warburg Institute, University of London: Ph.D. in Historical Studies. Dissertation: Studies on the Mathematical and Astronomical Papers of Sir Henry Savile (1549–1622). Director: Jill Kraye. 1992 Warburg Institute, University of London: M.A. with Distinction in Historical Studies. Dissertation: The Mathematical Sciences at Oxford in the Second Half of the Sixteenth Century. Director: Jill Kraye. ​ 1990 University of Canterbury, NZ: B.A. with First-Class Honors in Classics (Latin). 1989 University of Canterbury, NZ: B.Sc. in Mathematics. Employment 2010-present University of Notre Dame: Associate Professor, Program of Liberal Studies. Concurrent appointment in History Department; Fellow, Medieval Institute; Member, History and Philosophy of Science. 2003-2010 University of Notre Dame: Assistant Professor, Program of Liberal Studies. Concurrent appointment in History Department; Fellow, Medieval Institute; Member, History and Philosophy of Science. 1999-2000 Open University: Tutor in History of Mathematics. 1994-96 British Academy: Researcher contributing to catalogue Medieval British Manuscripts containing Commentaries on Aristotle. ​ 1993 Morley College, London: Adjunct Lecturer in Latin. 1991 University of Canterbury, NZ: Adjunct lecturer in Latin. Fellowships, Grants and Awards Major Honors and Awards 2016-17 Member, Institute for Advanced Study (Princeton) January 2021 2013 American Council of Learned Societies Fellowship. Fall 2012 National Endowment for the Humanities Fellowship, Newberry Library. 2012-13 Dibner Fellowship (NEH), Huntington Library (declined). 2006-07 National Endowment for the Humanities Faculty Fellowship. 2006-07 NEH Fellowship, Folger Institute (declined). 2000-03 Cotsen Fellow (Society of Fellows in the Liberal Arts), Princeton University.
    [Show full text]