AMERICAN STUDIES PROGRAM PROPOSAL FOR SUMMER 2011 RESEARCH GRANT

Program Objective The core of the Summer Research Program is to employ students as research assistants for faculty scholars. These positions will match students and faculty according to research interests and will be intended to support the student’s development of an understanding of the techniques of intellectual inquiry and research.

Recruitment Faculty affiliated with American Studies will be invited to take advantage of this opportunity to work with an undergraduate research assistant and interested students will be encouraged to apply. The Director of the program will facilitate matching students with appropriate mentors. The American Studies Program has offered successful Summer Research Programs since 2002 and hopes to continue making this valuable opportunity available to students and faculty.

Student Responsibilities The expectation is that the student will work approximately 30 hours per week on specific tasks assigned by the faculty member, and another 10 hours per week pursuing the student’s own related academic interest with the faculty member’s guidance. For some students, this may be preliminary research for an honors thesis in American Studies. For others the exposure to faculty research may foster interest in future graduate study.

Mentoring Oversight of the program is provided by the Director of American Studies, Shelley Fisher Fishkin, who will be in contact with the faculty advisers, monitoring that the program guidelines are being met and that each student-faculty research team understands and are in compliance with the guidelines. Faculty will meet individually with the student assistants, meeting with them regularly and providing direction and feedback.

Students who have completed summer research will be encouraged to continue doing research that culminates in an American Studies Honors Project (or in a departmental honors project, for those students from other majors).

Budget We request funds for three student stipends for summer research (each @$14 per hour for 40 hours a week for 10 weeks) for a total of $16,800.

October 11, 2011 Shelley Fisher Fishkin, Director of American Studies Monica Moore, Program Administrator VPUE Departmental Grant for Undergraduate Research: 2010-2011 Anthropology Department Proposal

The Sea Islands Cultural Heritage Preservation Project

Project Objective The Department of Anthropology's goal in developing a VPUE-funded series of field school programs is to provide research-training experience to undergraduates alongside faculty members to learn important methodological tools necessary for anthropological research. The Sea Islands field school has its field site the barrier islands and the coastal region of South Carolina and Georgia, also known as the Gullah/Geechee Cultural Heritage Corridor. The field school aims to explore the cultural and geographic past and present of the region, immersing undergraduate students into anthropological field methodology, including archival research, ethnographic interviews, surveys, mapping and GIS, data analysis, and participant-observation.

Student Activities Anthropological fieldwork is unique in that it requires researchers to undertake a variety of methodologies. Collaborating with faculty on research provides a key entry into methodological and ethical aspects of Anthropology. In the Sea Islands field school, students conduct archival research on landscape history, tourism and cultural heritage, assist in the collection of historical spatial data, collaborate with staff at the Avery Research Center in Charleston, conduct ethnographic interviews, engage in participant observation, and work on small research projects that form part of the faculty's larger research.

Mentoring Strategies Oversight occurs constantly in the field, as students work directly with faculty, as well as the graduate student project assistant. In the Sea Islands Field school, student work is supervised by the faculty member, an academic staff and a graduate student assistant, who will accompany them to the field. Academic staff and faculty from institutions in North and South Carolina also take an active role in mentoring the students.

Student Final Products Many students are either exploring a major or learning field skills so they can go on to advanced study. The projects in this grant provide opportunities for students to develop individual research projects, honors theses, and internships. In the Sea Islands Field School, students deliver the material collected in interviews and a list of relevant archival sources, including maps, photographs, and voice recordings, as much as possible in digital format. They produce a small research paper and deliver a professional presentation of their research at the Avery Research Center, College of Charleston, Charleston, SC.

Evaluation Process The main evaluation for the Anthropology Department's projects comes in the on-sight supervision of the students’ work in the field. In the Sea Islands Field School, students develop with the faculty a detailed plan for their respective projects as well as a timeline and deliverables before their departure to the field. Once in the field, students debrief in daily team meetings, provide written and oral progress reports, and discuss strategies for the subsequent steps in their research.

1. Research program goals:

During 2010-2011, VPUE funding is sought for the The Sea Islands Cultural Heritage Preservation Project, led by Professor Paulla Ebron. This project is distinctive, both in the emphasis on anthropological tradition and anthropological methodologies in fieldwork, and in providing undergraduate student researchers with opportunities to explore the interconnections between anthropological, ethnographic, and ethnohistoric practices. There are currently about 60 undergraduate Anthropology majors in the department. This program is among the first of its kind proposed by the Anthropology Department to involve students first hand in faculty research projects. It will act as example of the options available for students to take part in anthropological and ethnographic field research, with the hopes that more programs of this kind will emerge in future granting cycles.

The Department of Anthropology's goal in developing a department-wide VPUE-funded series of fieldwork and mentoring programs is to provide an integrated research-training experience to complement the department's substantial program efforts in independent undergraduate research. The already sizable research involvement of undergraduates in Anthropology, plus the increasing individual faculty use of VPUE funding suggest that students would further benefit from experiences that involve participating in field research alongside faculty members in order to learn important methodological tools necessary for anthropological training, such as ethnographic interviews, surveys, and participant-observation. The Department of Anthropology involves faculty who are already committed to the mentoring sub-projects comprising this proposal. The department expects that the program proposed in this grant application will both serve as a stand-alone introduction to the research process, and as part of a trajectory towards subsequent independent undergraduate research, which our program fosters through a series of grants and courses in research methods.

Budget Request A total of $36,600, including $2,500 for a graduate student "field school assistant" stipend and expenses (on average, $6,000 per undergraduate student participant), is requested for the summer of 2010-2011.

The Sea Islands Cultural Heritage Preservation Project This project centers around memory, landscape, the making of landscape, and political activists that are part of making the Sea Islands one of the most significant sites of African American culture. Landscape studies has become one of the most dynamic fields bridging the natural and social sciences with the humanities. A multi-dimensional field school explores post-slavery landscapes in the Sea Islands, with a focus on environmental history, science studies, and cultural geography to bring the materiality of flora and fauna into considerations of culture and history. It involves undergraduate students in many aspects of anthropological field methodology, including attending public hearings on the Gullah-Geeche corridor, visiting islands and significant landscapes and landmarks, conducting interviews and data analysis, and making use of the anthropological method of participant-observation.

The Sea Islands lie at the intersection between Africa and African America. It is the site where scholars have best shown that the agency and cultural heritage of Africans made a difference in the making of the North American political economy. African American history, linguistics, folklore, photography, art, film, and literature are all focused on this small region as the site of the most authentic New World African culture. The central question in this project concerns the cosmopolitan regionalism, from its history of citizenship schools to the plant history in the Sea Islands. The contemporary Sea Islands have been organized for tourism, yet this apparently effortless tropicality rests on histories of painful naturalization and discipline—for both humans and nonhumans. It is within this layered history, then, that Sea Island regionality must be understood.

The project builds on the scholarship of Sea Island-oriented historians and geographers; however, it adds several new questions to their work. First, by tracing the travels and responses of plants and microorganisms, undergraduate student researchers will help to animate the landscape, showing a new dimension of Sea Island regionality. Second, in order to do this, they will investigate a wide swathe of space and time. This includes multiple historical layers, from plantations to golf courses, following the thread of regional “tropicality” in landscaping. Student researchers will aid Prof. Ebron in investigating nonhuman histories, particularly for crops and disease organisms that take me across continents to consider what happens when such nonhumans travel. How do older locations in the evolutionary histories and cultural geographies of such organisms make a difference in their responses to the naturalization process? What is the relationship between representations and material histories? What is the “big story” that can be told about where representations and material histories meet.

2. Research program structure and organization (including, but not limited to mentoring structure, timeline, program size, planned group activities) a) The field school director is Professor Paulla Ebron b) A graduate student "field school program assistant" is responsible for managing and monitoring student progress, arranging and coordinating visits, tours and transportation, and aiding in maintaining safety precautions for students in the field school. c) Students preparation for the fieldwork will start in Spring. In regular meetings students will become familiar with the relevant literature, be trained in necessary technical areas and methods and develop a project plan for their respective projects. They will familiarize themselves with the online shared workspace which will help to trace the different projects and facilitate collaboration within the group. The field school itself is structured in two main parts. In the first two weeks students are being introduced to the area, get to know the local facilities and archives in Charleston, SC, visit various sites in South Carolina and Georgia, and meet with key informants and academic staff and faculty. In the second half students start to work on their respective projects and begin to engage in their own field research. The last 5 days of the field school consist of intense workshops where students receive detailed feedback regarding the paper drafts and presentation style, which they work into their final product. End product of those 2 weeks is a professional 15 min paper that students present publicly. Students will prepare the final reports and deliverables in early September. d) All finances will be managed by Professor Paulla Ebron. 3. Plan for faculty and administrative oversight of the program

In addition to the faculty director, Professor Paulla Ebron, the following mentors will be involved in the project: Dr. John Herman Blake, Researcher in Residence, Medical University of South Carolina, Dr. Dale Rosengarten, College of Charleston Library, Dr. Patricia Williams- Lessane, Executive Director of the Avery Research Center, Ms. Georgette Mayo and Ms. Deborah Wright, Archivists at the Avery Research Center, Dr. Carter Hudgins, Director of Preservation, Drayton Hall Plantation, Mr. DJ Tucker, Magnolia Plantation, Prof. Portia Cobb, Associate Professor in Film at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, Cari Goetcheus, Assistant Professor, Department of Planning and Landscape Architecture, Clemson University. These mentors will oversee and guide the undergraduate student researchers, working closely with them on each dimension of the project.

4. Description of the research or scholarly activities in which students will be engaged

Students will visit the archives and do research on historical documents about landscape history and Gullah culture. This includes maps, plans, newspaper articles, audio and visual material, and data on plantations and crops. Students read and interpret historical documents, like letters and photographs. Archives will include University North Carolina, Chapel Hill where the largest collection of Sea Island material exists, the University of South Carolina in Columbia, SC and the Avery Research Center in Charleston, and the South Carolina Historical Society. In addition, students will attend relevant events, and engage in participant observations during tours and plantation visits. They also will conduct open ended interviews with local informants. Students take field notes and work with interview material, which they analyze with the team.

For a detailed agenda of the 2010 Field school please see attachments.

5. Procedures and requirements for recruitment of students and faculty

Student recruitment will begin at the end of fall quarter, and will include the circulation of information and research applications, as well as information sessions. Presentations will be made by Prof. Paulla Ebron, and announcements will be made to a number of key relevant Anthropology undergraduate classes and in related fields such as Sociology and African American Studies. Students should have an interest in the civil rights movement, tourism, cultural preservation, heritage, landscape. Prior experience in GIS, mapping, ethnographic interviewing and archival research or museums work would be ideal, but not required. Students will be chosen based on the following criteria: 1) Interest and experience conducting field research 2) Evidence of flexibility and endurance in socially and environmentally taxing situations 3) Year of study at Stanford 4) Initiative 5) Faculty references

(6) Student product

Students are required to provide regular status reports of their work in progress. They are required to write and present a 15 min paper about their research in a public event at the Avery Research Center, and they are required to submit a final, written paper after the end of the field school. Students can get credit for the Summer Program Workshop, and use their research experience towards their own senior and Honors theses.

(7) Plan for program evaluation

Students will be required to submit regular brief status reports of their work in progress that will be shared with others within the research group either in face to face meetings or over an access- restricted online platform (Coursework). Prof. Paulla Ebron and her team will monitor those reports and provide feedback. Students can get credit for Summer Program Workshop. Midway through the project, students will produce a written evaluation and status report about their experiences in the field, and Prof. Ebron will make any necessary adjustments based on this information. In the autumn quarter, following the summer field program, undergraduate students are required to complete the VPUE online research evaluation administered by the UAR office. The responses may be used to improve the program in subsequent years.

Outcomes of past programs:

If funded, 2010-2011 would be the fourth season of the Sea Island Field School. VPUE has already sponsored three successful seasons (2007-08, 2008-09, and 2009-2010), which have allowed us to grow and improve our program. Outcomes of those prior seasons can be subsumed under the following areas:

High quality of student research. Within a very quick amount of turnaround time students are expected to learn about a region and its history that is new to them, develop a research topic, which matches faculty research interest, engage in fieldwork and data collection, and produce a professional level paper. Without exception, students have successfully met those expectations. Their presentations are highly professional and are met with great interest from an audience of around 25 to 30. This includes local mentors, commissioners from the Gullah-Geechee-Heritage Corridor Commission, members of the National Park Service, representatives of the Sweet Grass Basket Association, and faculty of the College of Charleston. The student papers have received high praise from the community and the academic collaborators in the field school and are remembered for their quality and impact beyond the actual summer field school.

Student projects were entitled: “Deconstructing the Saint: A More Dynamic Portrait of Septima P. Clark” (Sasha Novis) “The Role of Education in Cultural Preservation” (Darius White) “Blue Bonanza: The Short but Dynamic Span of Indigo in South Carolina” (Jillesa Gebhard) “Understanding Slavery Through the Lowcountry Plantation Tour” (Robert Manly) “Swimming With the Fish: The Dilemma of Preserving Music” (Maggie Sachs) “Gullah/Geechee Culture and Lowcountry Cooking” (Alyssa Baldocchi) “The Land Will Remember: Holding onto Property, Passing on History” (Devney Hamilton) “"I am my brother's keeper": The Teachings of Esau Jenkins” (Camira Powell) “More than Living Landmarks: Resources and Values of the Gullah/Geechee Cultural Heritage Corridor” (Danny Townes) Collaboration with local communities. One major goal of this project is to involve and work with local communities. A close collaboration with the Avery Research Center was started, which constitutes the home base of the group. Thanks to a close interaction with the Avery Research Center staff and director, as well as the mentorship of Dr. J. Herman Blake, the research team has been able to grow an important network within local communities, including the sweetgrass basket makers in Mount Pleasant, SC and members of the Hog Hammock community on Sapelo Island, GA. Through these interactions the team has been able to participate in hearings concerning the Gullah/Geechee Cultural Heritage Corridor. This led to active interest in the research conducted in the Sea Island project. Prof. Ebron was interviewed by the local newspaper regarding her view on the Gullah Geeche Heritage Corridor in 2009.

The Avery Research Center also provides the venue for the public student presentations, that are an attempt to give back to the communities involved. Those presentations have been received with much interest and lively discussions. Statements like “People have to come from Stanford to make us value our own culture” indicate that there is a strong feeling that the student work gives pride and ownership of the local heritage.

Contribution to faculty research. Student research has contributed to faculty research. The research projects they work on are directly linked to larger questions of the Sea Island research, such as tourism or Septima Clark's citizen schools. In addition, their participation in the field work has helped build even wider and stronger connections and put a network in a place that is traditionally hesitant to open up to researchers. Often informants are more inclined to interact with students, who they can “teach”, than with senior researchers, who are met with suspicion. Interactions through between community people and the group always lead to more questions. It is an enormous value to understand the project from the students’ point of view. Learning about the kind of questions students deem as relevant provides a different perspective on the research.

Long term impact on student careers. One field school participant (White) was awarded a Mellon Mays Fellowship. Three participants of the field school have completed or are currently working on an Honors Thesis (Novis, Sachs, Manly). One of those students (Novis) did fieldwork in South America through the SIT study abroad program, which in her own words “benefited from her prior summer doing fieldwork in South Carolina”. She also applied for funding from VPUE to present a paper at the Institute for Conflict Analysis and Resolution (ICAR) at George Mason University. A second one of those students (Sachs) was accepted as co- term in Religious Studies and conducted field work in India. Students from the field school 2008-2009 (Manly, Baldocchi, Sachs) were invited to present their field school research at an undergraduate conference at USC Columbia, SC, but were unable to attend. Students of the field school 2009-2010 (Towns, Powell, Hamilton) teamed up to jointly present their field school research at the Symposium of Undergraduate Research (SURPS) in October 2010 under the title “Land, Education, Politics: Forming Identity in the Gullah-Geechee Corridor”.

Field school Website: http://www.stanford.edu/~pebron/fieldschool.html Charleston Post and Courier report with Ebron interview: http://www.postandcourier.com/news/2009/jul/02/keeping_gullah_culture_alive87821/ Avery Research Center newsletter publication about the field school: http://avery.cofc.edu/fall_08_final%20(3).pdf

Budget Notes:

Budget requests include a graduate student as field school program assistant to help mentor and guide undergraduate student researchers.

The purpose of the graduate assistant for the Sea Island Field School is to direct and enhance the experience of the undergraduate researchers. He or she plays the dual role of academic liaison and resident assistant, working to translate the field school’s formal instruction in an informal setting. The graduate assistant is responsible for arranging meals, organizing outings, supervising the housing arrangements, and serving as the go between in all matters pertaining to the personal maintenance of the undergraduate students. During the second half of the field school, students will move around individually depending on the research they are undertaking for example, some of the students will be in one site with Prof. Ebron, while others will remain at the other site with the graduate assistant fulfilling different aspects of the research project. At the same time, the graduate assistant works to guide the research endeavors of students who are encountering ethnographic methods for the first time and often struggling to understand its ethical and conceptual parameters. Part-mentor and part-companion, the graduate assistant is absolutely crucial to the success of the students’ projects, their intellectual growth, and the general well- being of the research team.

The rigors of research in the Sea Islands challenge even the most seasoned ethnographers, and we have found that graduate students are ideally situated to play the role of academic intermediary. If fieldwork is an enormous opportunity for undergraduates, it can also be mentally demanding and emotionally draining. Even the most motivated undergraduates are apt to feel frustrated or confused at different moments in the learning process. The graduate assistant is there to shepherd them through these difficult times, to guide them in their encounters with tough questions, and to support them when they feel anxious or lost. Their proximity in age allows undergraduates to bond with the graduate assistant. At the same time, the graduate assistant acts as a role model who sets a tone for the undergraduates and helps them understand what is expected of them.

For most of our undergraduates, this is the first time that they have lived in an environment away from home or school, and supervision is absolutely essential. The purpose of having a graduate assistant in the same quarters with the undergraduate researchers is to create a harmonious living situation. Like a resident assistant, the graduate assistant works to build community, attends to any personal problems that might arise, and (if necessary) enforces rules that are important for the safety and well-being of the students. Their presence gives undergraduates the confidence that they are in a supportive environment.

[email protected] [email protected]

Sun Jun 13, 2010 Wed Jun 16, 2010

8pm - 10pm Arrival Dinner - Run through student project descriptions 9:30am - 1:30pm Ossabaw Island Tour Where: Mellow Mushroom, 309 King Street Creator: [email protected] for Robert Samet Creator: Robert Samet 3pm - 5pm Savannah Gullah tour Mon Jun 14, 2010 Creator: [email protected] for Robert Samet

get CoC student IDs 5pm - 8pm Return to Charleston Mon Jun 14, 2010 - Tue Jun 15, 2010 Creator: [email protected] for Robert Samet Creator: [email protected] for Robert Samet 8pm - 10pm Evening Session #2: Student workshop Pick up Parking Pass Creator: Robert Samet Mon Jun 14, 2010 - Wed Jun 16, 2010 Where: Calhoun Street side of the Joe E. Berry Jr. Residence Hal Thu Jun 17, 2010 Creator: Robert Samet 9am - 12pm Magnolia Plantation with DJ Tucker 8am - 11am Creator: Robert Samet Student Led Tour of Charleston , icl slave mart museum, colonial 2pm - 3pm Skype/phone Prof. Allison Dorsy lake, unitarian church and graveyard Creator: [email protected] for Robert Samet Creator: Robert Samet 3:30pm - 4:30pm Addlestone Library cards 12pm - 1pm Lunch Creator: [email protected] for Robert Samet Creator: Robert Samet Fri Jun 18, 2010 2pm - 4pm Meet Dr. Blake at his office Creator: Robert Samet 6:45am - 11:30am Portia Cobb visit in Hollywood Where: Hollywood 4pm - 5pm Visit to Avery Creator: [email protected] for Robert Samet Where: 125 Bull Street Creator: Robert Samet 1pm - 5pm Research Creator: Robert Samet 6:30pm - 7:30pm Evening Session #1: Fieldnotes, Prepare Chas Gullah Tour Creator: Robert Samet Sat Jun 19, 2010

Tue Jun 15, 2010 10am - 12:30pm Boone Hall Plantation Creator: [email protected] for Robert Samet Pick up Parking Pass Mon Jun 14, 2010 - Wed Jun 16, 2010 2pm - 5pm Research Where: Calhoun Street side of the Joe E. Berry Jr. Residence Hal Creator: [email protected] for Robert Samet Creator: Robert Samet Sun Jun 20, 2010 8am - 12pm Avery Introductions and Tour Where: Avery 12pm - 6pm Field Trip to Sapelo Island, GA Creator: Robert Samet Where: Charleston Creator: Robert Samet 4:30pm - 7pm Drive to Savannah Creator: [email protected] for Robert Samet Mon Jun 21, 2010

7:30pm - 9pm Preparation for Ossabaw & Savannah Tour 8:30am - 4pm Sapelo Creator: Robert Samet Creator: Robert Samet [email protected] [email protected]

Tue Jun 22, 2010 Tue Jun 29, 2010

7am - 8am Ferry back to Meridian (Mainland) Individual fieldwork and writing Creator: Robert Samet Tue Jun 29, 2010 - Sat Jul 3, 2010 Creator: [email protected] for [email protected] 10am - 1:30pm St helena Creator: [email protected] for Robert Samet 9:30am - 1:30pm Archaeology fieldtrip to Drayton Hall Creator: [email protected] for [email protected] 8pm - 10pm debrief Creator: [email protected] for Robert Samet Wed Jun 30, 2010

Wed Jun 23, 2010 Individual fieldwork and writing Tue Jun 29, 2010 - Sat Jul 3, 2010 10am - 5pm Research and Archival work Creator: [email protected] for [email protected] Creator: Robert Samet 9:30am - 4:30pm Georgetown - interviews 6pm - 7pm Film: when rice was king Creator: [email protected] for [email protected] Creator: [email protected] for Robert Samet Thu Jul 1, 2010 Thu Jun 24, 2010 Individual fieldwork and writing 10am - 5pm research and archive Tue Jun 29, 2010 - Sat Jul 3, 2010 Creator: [email protected] for Robert Samet Creator: [email protected] for [email protected] 6pm - 9pm Public viewing Daughters of the dust 10am - 6pm Research and interview time Where: Avery Creator: [email protected] for [email protected] Creator: [email protected] for Robert Samet 8pm - 9pm Film: corridor of shame Fri Jun 25, 2010 Creator: [email protected] for [email protected] 7:30am - 7pm Fri Jul 2, 2010 Field trip to Georgetown, Waccamah River, Rice Museum, Pawleys Island Individual fieldwork and writing Creator: Robert Samet Tue Jun 29, 2010 - Sat Jul 3, 2010 8pm - 9pm debrief Creator: [email protected] for [email protected] Creator: [email protected] for Robert Samet 10am - 6pm Research and Writing time Sat Jun 26, 2010 Creator: [email protected] for [email protected]

10am - 5pm free time and reserach time 8pm - 9pm paper abstract due Creator: [email protected] for Robert Samet Creator: [email protected] for [email protected]

Sun Jun 27, 2010 9pm - 10pm Film: language you cry in Creator: [email protected] for [email protected] 2pm - 5pm GGNHC Diversity Discussion Forum Creator: [email protected] for Robert Samet Sat Jul 3, 2010

Mon Jun 28, 2010 1pm - 6pm writing Creator: [email protected] for [email protected] 4pm - 6pm 2 week field research plans due (draft) Creator: [email protected] for Robert Samet Sun Jul 4, 2010 10am - 12pm Practice presentations #1 Creator: [email protected] for [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]

3pm - 5:30pm Toogoodoo Cookout Fri Jul 9, 2010 Creator: [email protected] for [email protected] 2pm - 3:30pm Presentations at Avery Mon Jul 5, 2010 Creator: Robert Samet

Individual fieldwork and writing 5:30pm - 7:30pm Dinner with guests Mon Jul 5, 2010 - Fri Jul 9, 2010 Creator: [email protected] for Robert Samet Creator: [email protected] for [email protected] Sat Jul 10, 2010 10am - 5pm writing 10am - 3:30pm Housecleaning and Packing Creator: [email protected] for [email protected] Creator: Robert Samet 7pm - 9pm Practice presentations #2 5pm - 7:30pm Beach Trip Creator: [email protected] for [email protected] Creator: Robert Samet Tue Jul 6, 2010 Sun Jul 11, 2010 Individual fieldwork and writing Departures Mon Jul 5, 2010 - Fri Jul 9, 2010 Sun Jul 11, 2010 - Mon Jul 12, 2010 Creator: [email protected] for [email protected] Creator: [email protected] for Robert Samet 10am - 5pm Writing 9am - 1pm To the airport Creator: [email protected] for [email protected] Creator: Robert Samet 6pm - 8pm Film: Conroy - Water is wide Creator: [email protected] for [email protected]

Wed Jul 7, 2010

Individual fieldwork and writing Mon Jul 5, 2010 - Fri Jul 9, 2010 Creator: [email protected] for [email protected]

10am - 4:30pm Fieldtrip to Hilton Head Creator: [email protected] for [email protected]

6pm - 8pm Practice presentations #3 Creator: [email protected] for [email protected]

Thu Jul 8, 2010

Individual fieldwork and writing Mon Jul 5, 2010 - Fri Jul 9, 2010 Creator: [email protected] for [email protected]

10am - 12pm Pracice Presentations #4 Creator: [email protected] for [email protected]

4pm - 6pm practice presentations -dress rehearsal Creator: [email protected] for [email protected] Stanford Archaeology Center VPUE Departmental Grant Application October 13, 2010

I. OBJECTIVES

In 2009-2010, the Archaeology Center used the VPUE Departmental Grant funds to take 28 undergraduate students to work with 4 faculty members on Archaeology summer field projects in Peru, Turkey, England, and New Mexico. Among the students represented were Archaeology majors, Classics majors, Anthropology majors, Hum Bio majors (to name a few), as well as a few undeclared freshman and sophomores. The summer field school experience exposed these students the unique opportunity to do hands-on archaeological field work and research alongside esteemed Stanford faculty. The Archaeology Center has been fortunate to receive generous funding support provided by VPUE in past years, which is much appreciated, as field work is an essential part of our program and major requirement for undergraduates, and it's a great opportunity for non-majors to learn more about archaeological digs and related research. We look forward to continuing to provide Stanford students with the opportunity to gain hands-on Archaeology experience on Archaeology sites across the globe.

Our current proposal requests funding for continued support of these 4 field projects, as well as funding for 1 new field project in China directed by Professor Li Liu, a new Stanford Faculty member.

A core priority for the Archaeology Center is to provide students with learning and research opportunities in excavation and other forms of archaeological fieldwork. This application requests $184,910 to support the participation of 48 undergraduates (average cost: $3,852 per student) in 5 major archaeological field projects directed by Stanford faculty in Turkey, Peru, the United States, England, and China during the summer of 2011.

These field projects are the primary options for archaeology students to take part in archaeological field research at Stanford. They provide opportunities for students to hone their field skills, develop individual research projects, and pursue honors thesis research. In addition, as excavators and surveyors, they perform the primary data collection and field research on these projects. Participation is not restricted to Archaeology majors alone, although preference is given to them. Archaeological field experience is a requirement of the Archaeology major, and these projects fulfill that requirement. In addition, it is almost impossible for students to enter a good archaeology graduate program without field experience. The Center expects that the programs described in this application will serve both as a stand-alone introduction to the research process and as part of a trajectory toward subsequent independent undergraduate research.

II. RESEARCH GOALS AND ORGANIZATION OF EACH PROJECT

1. The Catalhöyük Project will provide research opportunities for approximately 8 undergraduate student researchers. The total estimated budget is $35,160 (on average, less than $4,500.00 per each of the 8 undergraduate student researchers).

The current excavations under the direction of Ian Hodder began in 1993. The site is a 9000- year-old town in central Turkey. It is famous for its great size (about 13 hectares) at an early date and its rich art and symbolism. It is key to the understanding of the origins of agriculture, the originals of settled life, and the growth of towns. The overall aims of the project have been to situate the art in its full environmental, economic, social, and cultural context. The specific aims starting in 2003, and remaining the same for the summer of 2011, are to use extensive excavation methods to open up larger areas of the site so that overall community structure can be studied, and so that larger numbers of buildings can be put on display for tourism.

a) Ian Hodder is the “director,” overseeing all aspects of the project, which has 120 members. Up to 80 are on site at any one time. b) Shahina Farid is the “site director,” overseeing the day-to-day running of all aspects of the project at Catalhöyük. c) 2 Turkish government representatives (names unknown until just before the excavation season) monitor the work of the project. d) A large number of “specialists” oversee specific aspects of the project, and all are involved in training undergraduates. Each group of specialists is led by a “laboratory head.” The main heads are:

Tristan Cater (McMaster University), lithics; Amy Bogaard (Oxford), archaeobotany; Clark Larsen (Ohio State) and Simon Hillson (London), human remains; Liz Pye (London), conservation; Wendy Matthews (Reading), micromorphology; Arlene Rosen (London), phytoliths; Rissa Russell (Cornell) and Kathy Twiss (Stoney Brook), archaezoology; Karen Wright (London), ground stone; Nurcan Yalman (Istanbul), ceramics; Lynn Meskell (Stanford) figurines. e) Two main excavation areas are to be divided into 5 units each. Each of the resulting 10 units has a professional archaeologist as “team head”. In the designated area of excavation for the Stanford team, a graduate student “crew Chief” will act as an “additional supervisor”. This role of “crew chief” is of utmost importance for the safety and education of the undergraduate student researchers. In addition, another secondary professional archaeologist will assist with undergraduate training. In particular, undergraduate student researchers will work and excavate, one-on-one, with professional archaeologists: Lisa Yeomens, Roddy Regan, James Taylor, Michael House, and Daniel Eddisford. Undergraduate students will report, daily, to the professional archaeologists. Afternoons will be devoted to Laboratory work, supervised by various “team leaders” and overseen by the graduate student “crew chief”.

2. The Chavín de Huántar Project in Peru, led by Prof. John W. Rick will provide research opportunities for approximately 10 undergraduate student researchers. The total estimated budget is $34,000 (on average, less than $3,500.00 per each of the 10 undergraduate student researchers).

John W. Rick proposes to continue a program of research mentorships for the summer of 2011 in his research at the site of Chavín de Huántar, Peru. The research project is focused on understanding the origins of power and authority in evolving Andean politico-religious

2 organizations, concentrating on the site of Chavín and the immediately surrounding region. Chavín de Huántar was a monumental ceremonial center that developed during the Early Horizon period (1200-500 B.C.), a time that saw the emergence of strong social inequality and major inter-regional stylistic coherence in the Andes. The site is a World Heritage site as declared by UNESCO, and offers an exceptional opportunity for students to be involved with the issues surrounding a crucial cultural resource of a nation increasingly dependent on tourism. Faculty-led archaeological research at Chavin de Huantar, Peru is an ideal training opportunity for Stanford undergraduates interested in archaeological careers. The seven-week training program at this site emphasizes skills and areas of knowledge of great current importance, including not only practical archaeological field methods, such as excavation, surface documentation, and regional survey (site-locating), but also issues of site conservation and community relations. One of the main goals of this project is for students working directly with Professor Rick to learn excavation and documentation techniques, but also to deeply understand how sites like Chavín are valued and contribute to a local area’s economy.

a) John Rick is the “director,” overseeing all aspects of the project. b) Rosa Mendoza de Rick and Maria Mendoza are the “site field directors,” overseeing the day-to-day running of all aspects of the project at Chavin. c) Work will emphasize excavations and conservation in the major original drainage canal of the site, and in the major model project which aims to fully excavated and conserve one of the four largest ceremonial platforms of the central sacred district of ancient Chavín. Working directly with Rick, students will learn excavation and documentation techniques in structures of the Chavin period, while preparing the building to be stable and educational in its upcoming role of receiving visitors on a daily basis. Conservation techniques will include stone monument, architectural, and drainage preservation strategies, taught by expert U.S., Peruvian and other conservators. Community relations with the adjacent town of Chavin will involve participation in the town's patron saint fiesta, and specific work on developing National Museum of Chavin, a world-class museum opened in Chavin in the summer of 2008. Students will be involved with materials analysis in our full-function archaeological laboratory, run by doctoral candidates in Anthropology. Advanced Peruvian students and professionals make up part of the extensive staff training Stanford undergraduates. d) The director, John Rick, manages finances at the field site, with the assistance from the Archaeology administrative staff.

3. The Indigenous Archaeology and Pueblo History Field Project, American Southwest. Continuing with Prof. Michael Wilcox’ research on early colonial and contact period archaeology in the American Southwest, six Stanford undergraduates are invited to take part in a survey of Pueblos occupied and attacked during Francisco Vasquez Coronado’s Entrada of 1540 as well as those Pueblo communities constructed during the Great Pueblo Revolt of 1680. The Revolt of 1680 was the only instance in which colonial powers were defeated and expelled by a multi-ethnic coalition of Native Peoples. Previous generations of historians and archaeologists have largely ignored the social and cultural legacies of colonial violence during the 16 and 17th centuries. Wilcox latest book “The Pueblo Revolt and the Mythology of Conquest: An Indigenous Archaeology of Contact (2009 University of California Press) examines the relationship between social violence, used as a means of intimidating and controlling Indigenous

3 populations in the Americas, and larger social movements of rebellion such as the Revolt of 1680. This field season will include visits to several poorly documented Entrada period villages, a thorough exploration of official and un-official historical and archaeological narratives, and an examination of the dynamic interplay of tourism, secrecy, sacredness and community among Native Peoples in the Southwest. The Project is expected to last approximately three weeks, from June 20th until July 11th.

4. The Roman Binchester Project in England, led by Prof. Michael Shanks, will provide research opportunities for 20 undergraduate student researchers. Known to the Romans as Vinovium (“On the Wine Road”), Binchester protected Dere Street, the main road that ran from the legionary headquarters at York northwards to Hadrian’s Wall. It was a key element of the complex frontier system that lay both sides of the Wall, forming the edge of empire for nearly four hundred years. Geophysical survey from 2006-2009 has revealed a large town that stayed thriving long after the empire fell; Binchester can shed light on the end of empire and transition to the Anglo-Saxon kingdom of Northumbria, heartland of Celtic Christianity. Beginning with excavation of part of the fort, the cemetery and sections of the town, and with broader site prospection and regional survey, The project aims to investigate the character and diversity of the local populations by analyzing the cemetery remains in the context of other evidence for life- styles, to explore connections between fort and town through interpretation of material culture as well as the architectural and structural connections, and to pursue questions concerning the way the border was conceived and worked from Roman to medieval times by developing a model of the regional settlement and economic system.

A Project Management Committee comprises faculty from Stanford and Durham (Michael Shanks with Professors Richard Hingley and David Petts from Durham), postdoctoral expertise (Chatfield, Devore and Platt from Stanford), local government representation (Dr David Mason) and an excavation manager (Dr Peter Carne). This committee is responsible for the research design. The field school curriculum has been developed with the Department of Archaeology, Durham University, and is accredited as a core class in Durham’s undergraduate major. Implementation of the research design and field school, as well as the daily running of the site is in the hands of Durham’s professional archaeology unit. Specialist and local expertise in finds, palaeoenvironment, geophysics and analytical techniques is drawn principally from the labs in Durham University’s Department of Archaeology, but with specialist input from other universities too. In 2011 we are planning for a team of 90 drawn from Durham, Stanford and other universities, with 50 on site at any one time. The excavation season will last from the beginning of June to the end of July, with survey extending before and after. Preparatory sessions will be held at Stanford in the second half of Spring Quarter 2011. The field season for Stanford will commence at the beginning of July and last four weeks.

5. The China Project led by Prof. Li Liu, aims to provide students with opportunities to study the material culture of ancient China, through fieldwork in China and laboratory analyses at Stanford Archaeology Center. Students will be trained in data collection, sample processing, and microscopic analyses of archaeological remains. This project focuses on the changing strategies of food procurement in prehistoric China.

4 Residue and usewear analyses, as currently employed in China, are the topical focus of the new project developed by Professor Liu. It will provide research opportunities for 4 student researchers. Because sample collection is a delicate task, and the entire field work procedure requires close supervision, we are unable to recruit more students for this year. The total estimated budget of $18,000 is requested to cover travel (international and domestic) and accommodations (hotels and food) for 4 undergraduates ($4,500 for each student). One graduate specialist, who plays an important role in supervision of the fieldwork, will seek support from other sources.

Recent research in China has shown that there was a long period (more than 10,000 years) of plant exploitation by hunter-gatherers prior to the appearance of the first domesticated plants, and agricultural intensification did not occur until 2000 years later. In addition, the plant foods consumed by the hunter-gatherers appear to have been much more diverse in type than those cultivated by early farmers. Early farmers seem to have consumed a narrower range of plant food types, by focusing on a few varieties which were perhaps suitable for domestication. Finally, the cultivation of these domesticated plants became intensified, resulting in the full development of Neolithic agricultural society. The current project is indented to document these two important changes in subsistence strategies: the transition from hunting-gathering to food production in early Holocene, and the process of agricultural intensification in middle Holocene. The understanding of these changes and innovations will help us to address the dynamic relationships between technology in food resource procurement and development of social complex in prehistory.

In order to address these research questions, we need to investigate archaeological cultures in one region that cover a broad temporal dimension. This will require the crew to collect samples from various sites. We will focus on north China, particularly in Inner Mongolia, where the earliest domesticated millet remains (c. 6200 BC) have been uncovered at Xinglongwa and one of the early Neolithic complex societies (Hongshan culture, c. 5000-3000 BC) developed. We will examine grinding stone tools from three sites in this region, dating to a long period from 6000 BC to 3000 BC. These grinding stones were presumably used for processing plant foods; this hypothesis will be tested by employing residue and usewear analyses in our project. Each student will develop a sub-project focused on a specific topic and will make detailed records of their work, which will contribute to the results of the overall Project. The fieldwork will extend for about 3 weeks.

1) Li Liu is the director of the China Project; 2) Sheahan Bestel (Special visiting graduate student at Stanford) is the graduate specialist; 3) Xingcan Chen (Deputy Director, Institute of Archaeology, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences) is our Project collaborator in China; 4) The field work will be assisted by Guoxiang Liu and other Chinese archaeologists at the Institute of Archaeology, who excavated the sites which we will visit; 5) The field work will begin in mid-June and last for three weeks.

III. STUDENT ACTIVITIES

5 These projects all teach fundamental archaeological field research skills and encourage the development of further research in collaboration with faculty and professional archaeologists.

1. Çatalhöyük All students spend four weeks learning basic excavation methods (use of tools, soil description, sampling, artifact collection and analysis, recording, drawing, photography, data entry), and some work more closely on the artifacts, bones, seeds, geology, digital recording, and conservation. The students create the primary data through excavation, and do most of the initial recording and classification. By the end of the season, they will have learned tool use, manual and digital recording protocols, the context sheet system, trench notebook entries, and cleaning of finds. Every student will have taken charge of his or her trench for at least one day, overseeing the recording, have made at least one entry into the trench’s video diary, and have given one presentation in a site tour. Fieldwork usually ends at 3:00pm, and, after a 2 hour break, work will continue in the dig house. In order to gain exposure to the greatest variety of study area/specialists, undergraduate student researchers rotate shifts from lab to lab every few days. In this way, the each student is able to gain experience in the faunal labs, the pottery and finds depot, the floral and botanical labs, the human bones lab, the photography databases, and in the entry of excavation data into the excavation database. Çatalhöyük is one of the few excavation sites in which sampling and study strategies can be observed and learned on site due to the large number of specialists in residence (most excavation sites do the laboratory work off-site and after the season has finished).

For the Catalhöyük Project, all students spend 5 weeks learning basic excavation methods (use of tools, soil description, sampling, artifact collection and analysis, recording, drawing, photography, data entry), and some work more closely on the artifacts, bones, seeds, geology, digital recording, and conservation. The students create the primary data through excavation, and do most of the initial recording and classification. By the end of the season, they will have learned tool use, manual and digital recording protocols, the context sheet system, trench notebook entries, and cleaning of finds. Every student will have taken charge of his or her trench for at least one day, overseeing the recording, have made at least one entry into the trench’s video diary, and have given one presentation in a site tour. In order to gain exposure to the greatest variety of study area/specialists, undergraduate student researchers rotate shifts from lab to lab every few days. In this way, the each student is able to gain experience in the faunal labs, the pottery and finds depot, the floral and botanical labs, the human bones lab, the photography databases, and in the entry of excavation data into the excavation database. Catalhöyük is one of the few excavation sites in which sampling and study strategies can be observed and learned on site due to the large number of specialists in residence (most excavation sites do the laboratory work off-site and after the season has finished).

2. Chavín de Huántar Research at the site for the seven weeks focuses on two primary methodologies: the application of digital technologies in documenting known surface and subsurface structures and artifacts, and detailed excavations within monumental and residential architectural contexts. Students learn the use of electronic theodolites and other laser-based measurement systems, whose results are used in building high precision three-dimensional CAD model of the site. Remote sensing equipment and its uses are part of our field experience, including resistivity evaluation and

6 ground penetrating radar. Excavations have been a major source of experience for undergraduates in learning field methodologies, and also for analyzing the abundant ceramic, bone, stone, and other retrieved remains. Additionally, the program is becoming increasingly sensitive to its own impact on this important monument, and are adding a major emphasis on conservation – the evaluation and implementation of long term site stability. They are working with an international team of conservators, and in turn are training 11 young townspeople of Chavin to carry on site conservation when we are not present. Similarly, Stanford students will help the town with the planning of the new Chavin Museum, and the conservation of the collections that will be on display.

3. Indigenous Archaeology and Pueblo History The field project combines ethnographic fieldwork with contemporary Pueblo Communities, visits to state and tribal museums and archives with traditional surveys and mapping of archaeological sites in New Mexico and Arizona. The Field Project (IAPH) will have three phases. The first segment involves an immersion in New Mexican and Pueblo histories through visits to museums, contact period archaeological sites along the Rio Grande and visits to contemporary Pueblo communities. The second phase will introduce students to the technical disciplines of mapping and survey among large Revolt Period villages in the Jemez Mountains of New Mexico. The final phase of research includes a collaborative mapping project with the Navajo Nation Archaeology Department in northern Arizona.

4. Roman Binchester Undergraduates help create the primary research data through excavation and survey, and do much of the initial recording and classification. As specified in our curriculum design, all students will experience the full range of primary field practices (use of tools and instruments, soil description, sampling, artifact collection, recording, drawing, photography, data entry), as well as working more closely on some of the artifacts, bones, and seeds, and other samples. By the end of the season they will have learned instrument use, manual and digital recording protocols, basic finds processing. A key component is geophysical site survey, because of the size of the town: Binchester offers extraordinary opportunity for students to gain experience in this research methodology. An archaeological field project is not simply data acquisition: as team members, students will participate in the ongoing interpretation of what is turned up, the iterative process of adapting research questions, hypotheses and strategies to the emerging data. The design of an onsite museum and interpretation center began in 2010, at least in planning; this will include student participation in crucial issues of Cultural Resource Management.

5. The China Project In China, students will learn to collect residue and usewear samples from artifacts such as stone tools. The samples will then be prepared for microscopic analysis in the Archaeobotany Lab at Stanford Archaeology Center, to identify starch and/or phytolith remains and usewear patterns. Students will be involved in collecting and documenting modern plant samples, which are used as references for comparative purposes. Students will also participate in experimental study of food processing, in order to understand how ancient tools may have been used.

IV. OVERSIGHT AND MENTORING; EVALUATION

7 Archaeological fieldwork differs from many research projects in that all students work together as members of larger teams, rather than individually, together with faculty, graduate trench supervisors (crew chiefs), and research specialists, with constant tutoring and feedback on the skills being practiced and the inferences and interpretations being made.

1. Çatalhöyük Teaching, faculty and “crew chief” oversight occurs constantly during fieldwork on the Catalhöyük Project. The trench supervisors and lab directors do most of the hands-on training. Students working in the labs are under the direct supervision of the relevant assistant director, lab head, and specialist. On site, in addition to working closely with their trench supervisors, each group is also visited several times per day by the project director and assistant/site director. This gives students a chance to see how experienced excavators debate the interpretation of stratigraphy and decide excavation strategy. On-site discussions in archaeology are very candid and undergraduate student researchers can make important contributions. Each excavation also has daily meetings for each trench and lab team to review progress. Everyone takes part in weekly site tours, in which each team explains its progress to the whole group. Every student gives at least one presentation and talks on video to summarize his or her work. There are also evening lectures. Because the entire team lives together on each project, there are constant opportunities for informal mentoring over communal dinners and on organized trips to other archaeological sites in the region. Fieldwork usually ends at 3:00pm at Catalhöyük Project, and, after a 2 hour break, work will continue in the “Dighouse”. Additionally, the “crew chief” oversees all undergraduate activities, and provides constant status reports and updates to the faculty member and other specialists on the project regarding the status of the undergraduate students.

2. Chavín de Huántar The faculty oversight and student mentoring comes from Professor John Rick’s full-time presence in the site, along with his graduate student "crew chief" and a team of four other graduate students and approximately eight other professional archaeologists and conservators. The project has a highly organized structure of responsibilities among the professional staff. All project members are required to participate in informal and formal educational efforts of the mentoring activities. Weekly talks are delivered in our auditorium area, and hands-on lab sessions happen nightly, with students rotating through lab tasks so as to gain a maximum breadth of experience. Further learning comes from the frequent visits of colleagues to this famous site; Prof. Rick asks these visitors to give lectures and share their expertise directly with our students.

3. Indigenous Archaeology Pueblo Fieldschool Students work in constant communication with, and receive ongoing feedback from, Prof. Michael Wilcox. The purpose of the Field Project is to expose students to the research methods employed by contemporary archaeologists and anthropologists. Skills involve the identification and processing of artifacts, the mapping of archaeological sites using total station and visual mapping techniques and the interpretation of historical narratives developed in museums.

4. Roman Binchester

8 The relatively flat management structure of the project, with the delegation of many daily routine tasks as well as management of the excavation to the professional field unit, has been deliberately designed so that there is more scope for close and constant supervision and feedback in the field, as well as opportunity for iterative reevaluation of research and pedagogical objectives. It also frees up PI Michael Shanks to spend more time in the trench and lab with students to oversee their apprentice role. The Stanford team will be circulating through different tasks on site as well as in the labs in Durham University. Responsibility here for supervision and mentoring will again be shared with the professional team members as well as post-doc expertise from Stanford: there are too many activities for MS to oversee alone. As well as the field research project and field school, students will participate in a “Master Class”, whatever their level of expertise and experience. This will comprise a series of workshops accompanying the excavation and field survey, led by faculty, professional staff and postgraduates, members of the project and visitors. Personal contact is a main vehicle for student evaluation as well as supervision. The use of social and participatory software in the running of the project facilitates indirect evaluation both of students and the project. Online diaries and two rounds of formal feedback surveys will refine evaluation further. All these are reviewed by project PI and, where appropriate, the Management Committee as a whole. That the project is an accredited component of the Durham University archaeology curriculum requires the adoption of a high level of documented curriculum design and prompts very careful monitoring and evaluation of the student experience.

5. The China Project A faculty member and a graduate specialist will lead the fieldwork and teach students the techniques of data collection and sample processing. Collecting residue and usewear samples from artifacts requires careful attentiveness and patience. At the lab, students will be working under close supervision of faculty, graduate specialist, and archaeologists from archaeology institutions in China.

The faculty member and the graduate specialist will maintain close supervision of students during the entire fieldwork. Our Chinese collaborators will also be available in the fieldwork to help students and answer questions. Student researchers will work five days per week on the project, and we will also organize visits to archaeological sites and museums during the weekends. Discussion and mentoring will occur whenever it is needed (during working time, lunch, dinner, etc.), since the crew will work together as one team during the entire fieldwork. Three evening lectures given by local Chinese archaeologists will be scheduled. One or two Chinese students from Institute of Archaeology will also participate in the project, and will have frequent scholarly interactions with Stanford students.

V. STUDENT FINAL PRODUCTS

1. Çatalhöyük Student researchers will be involved in producing the primary archive consisting of context sheets, feature sheets, building sheets, finds catalogs, etc. They will also be expected every day to write a diary entry about their interpretation of what has been found that day in relation to existing knowledge. These diary entries are placed on the project website and are used as part of final publications. Students will also work in the labs to provide short analytical reports that will

9 contribute to final publication. This work will involve use of the project library in order to make comparisons with other sites. Students will be expected to take on aspects of the analytical process (e.g., faunal analysis, ceramic analysis, GIS, etc.) in order to write reports that can be used in publication. At Catalhöyük, undergraduate students will have the opportunity to assist in the publication of the annual archive reports as well as the ultimate publication. They may also engage in self-designed research projects on any specific area or material of the excavation. We hope to encourage junior and senior students to embark on senior honors theses using material from the Catalhöyük Project.

2. Chavín de Huántar Students are required to complete a number of written products in the course of the field season. First, they are required to keep a detailed journal of their experiences in the form of a field notebook—a comparative summary of their observations and impressions in the context of the research tasks they are undertaking at the time. Second, students keep detailed field records on forms specific to excavation, survey, or lab work. Finally, students are required to take charge of a specific group of data—excavated remains, digital photographs, lab notebooks, etc., and they track these materials/information in a written notebook that portrays the actually research process, and reaches original conclusions. This process is continued through to professional writeup in the subsequent Fall Quarter Chavín seminar. Students are encouraged to present the individual parts of their research at undergraduate presentation events on campus and also to their fellow Stanford and Peruvian undergraduates as well. Typically 20-30% of the VPUE mentoring program students go on to individual Chavín research projects culminating in Honors or co-terminal MA theses, and a similar number engage in other related research experiences at Stanford. Students with Chavín experience have exceptional admittance rates to top graduate schools in archaeology, and Chavín participation is rapidly becoming recognized as a hallmark of student-level professionalization.

3. Indigenous Archaeology Pueblo Fieldschool Students will compile a field journal and contribute to the collection and interpretation of archaeological materials for State and Tribal agencies. Students who wish to incorporate this project into a senior or honor’s thesis with Professor Wilcox are encouraged to do so.

4. Roman Binchester Undergraduates will be involved in generating all parts of the standard data package/archive required by UK professional archaeological practice, a set of web-based diaries and commentaries on the field project and master class, and the provisional interpretive and analytic statements on specific components of the research questions. Several focused projects were initiated in 2010 (considering the design of the new site interpretation center, for example), and students will be offered an opportunity in 2011 to enhance their experience of the project through these. The Binchester project will also encourage students to consider pursuing their own interests through the development of honors theses.

5. The China Project Students will document the process of data collection, following established fieldwork protocols, will write up detailed descriptions of the artifacts subjected to sampling, and will record their

10 observations about the any visible surface features, on artifacts, which may be related to traces of tool use or organic residues.

Students will be trained in handling artifacts, collecting samples, recording data, and photographing artifacts. We plant to work on artifacts from three sites dating to different time periods, one week at each site. Students will be provided with protocols for conducting every step of the data-collection procedure, and work as a team to complete necessary tasks involved. Students will take turns being in charge of the working team, as a part of fieldwork experience. For training purposes, some modern plants collected will be prepared as mounted slides during the fieldwork, and the slides will be brought back to the Stanford Archaeology Center for microscopic analyses. By the end of the fieldwork, students are expected to have gained experience in the entire process of data collection, in some basic lab techniques for residue- and usewear-analysis, and in the participatory and leadership dimensions of team work in archaeological field research.

Student researchers will participate in producing a primary archive, including primary observation of artifacts, sampling records, and photography. Students are also required to keep a detailed journal of their experiences in their notebook, which will be kept in the project archive. But students can make photocopies of their journals for their own record. The residue and usewear samples collected during the fieldwork may be studied by students who will develop specific research topics for Honors theses based on the data. The results of such researches will make important contributions to the broader questions addressed in the project and may be prepared for publication.

VI. STUDENT RECRUITMENT

1. Çatalhöyük Because the Turkish government requires potential researchers’ names (students or otherwise) to be listed on permit applications by the start of November 2010 (for the field season in the summer of 2011), Professor Ian Hodder, the Catalhöyük Project Director, will have already selected a pool of prospective undergraduate student researchers in early October 2010. Undergraduate student researchers participating in the Catalhöyük Project are chosen from all departments/programs contributing to the Archaeology Center community. All undergraduate students who are offered a place at the Catalhöyük Project are required to attend several workshops and meetings during the autumn and winter quarters, as well as enrolling in CASA 108: History of Archaeological Thought with Professor Lynn Meskell. In addition, undergraduate student researchers receive a manual summarizing the project’s methods, recording techniques, and results. Many undergraduate students may also enroll in Turkish language classes.

Student recruitment is currently underway, with both information and application forms circulating (see addendum). A number of presentations have been made about the Catalhöyük opportunity, and announcements made during Catalhöyük information sessions and in-class announcements (see addendum). Interest is particularly strong this year, and the Archaeology Center is expecting 20 applicants. Students will be chosen based on the following criteria:

11 1) Intended major 2) Interest and experience in archaeology 3) Number of archaeology-related classes the student has taken 4) Year of study at Stanford 5) Initiative 6) Evidence of flexibility and endurance in socially and environmentally taxing situations 7) Faculty references

2. Chavín de Huántar Student recruitment takes place in early Winter Quarter, with both information and application forms made widely available. A number of presentations are made about the Chavin opportunity, and announcements made to a number of key relevant classes, such as the Human Biology Core course, Introduction to the Humanities, and Introduction to Prehistoric Archaeology, the gateway course to archaeology at Stanford. Interest has been particularly strong in recent years, with between 20 and 30 applicants. Students will be chosen based on the following criteria:

1) Interest and experience in archaeology 2) Interest and experience in Latin America 3) Spanish language ability 4) Evidence of flexibility and endurance in socially and environmentally taxing situations 5) Special skills brought to the project 6) Relevance to major course of study 7) Recommendations from faculty and other staff

3. Indigenous Archaeology Pueblo Fieldschool Students will be selected from applications submitted in the Winter and Spring, with special attention focused on those from under-represented backgrounds in archaeology, Freshman and Sophomore students who have participated in courses offered by the instructor (Freshman and Sophomore Seminars) as well as those interested in pursuing a degree (or graduate training) in archaeology.

4. Roman Binchester No prior archaeological experience will be required of undergraduates joining the project. The project will be advertised primarily through e-mail listing, announcements in appropriate classes, an online description of the project, and in several information sessions, including lectures in the Archaeology Center. Applications will be invited in the form of letters of application addressed to the project. These will be reviewed in early Winter term by as wide a committee of current team members as is feasible in order to ensure as diverse and compatible a team as possible. If necessary because of numbers, interviews will be held and preference will be given to Archaeology and Classics majors.

5. The China Project Student recruitment takes place in Winter Quarter, with information and application forms being widely circulated. Students will be selected based on the following criteria:

1) Interest and experience in archaeology

12 2) Interest in archaeobotany and stone tools 3) Willingness to experience living conditions less comfortable than what they are used to 4) Suitability for team work 5) Relevance to major course of study 6) Evidence of flexibility and endurance in socially and environmentally taxing situations 7) Chinese language ability preferred but not required 8) Faculty references

VII. BUDGETS The funds requested in this application are only for costs directly related to Stanford undergraduate student participation. All these projects necessarily seek substantial additional funding elsewhere to cover all other costs. Listed here are student airfare, ground transportation, visas, lodging, food, research materials and equipment.

Çatalhöyük, Turkey Airfare: $14,400 $1800/person x 8 undergraduates Ground transportation: $300/person x 8 undergraduates $2,400 Hotel: $250 x 8 undergraduates $2,000 (3 nights in Istanbul on the way to and from Çatal; necessary because the site is so far in the interior) Room and board on site $12,000 $50/person/day x 8 undergraduates x 30 days Research visa: $150/person x 8 undergraduates $ 1,200 Registration with Turkish authorities: $ 760 $95/person x 8 undergraduates Project materials and supplies : $300/person x 8 undergraduates $2,400 TOTAL ($4,395 per student) $35,160

Chavín de Huántar, Peru Airfare: $1,000/person x 10 undergraduates $10,000 Lodging, food and local transportation $24,000 $48/day/person x 10 students x 50 days TOTAL ($3,400.00 per student) $34,000

Pueblos Fieldschool, New Mexico and Arizona Airfare: $500/person x 6 undergraduates $3,500 Car rental and fuel $3,000 Lodging in Santa Fe (motels and campsites) for 8 people $6,000 Food: $150 per day x 21 days $3,150 Camping and survey equipment $ 600 Museum visit fees $ 500 TOTAL ($3,091.66 per student) $16,750

Binchester, England Airfare (r/t SFO – Newcastle, the local airport) $35,000

13 $1,750/person x 20 undergraduates Lodging (full room and board at St. Chad’s College, Durham) $42,000 $75/person/day x 20 people x 28 days Geophysical prospection equipment facilitation $4,000 (through Stanford Earth Sciences) TOTAL ($4,050.00 per student) $81,000

China Field Project International airfare (SFO-Beijing round-trip) $6,400 $1,600 per student x 4 Travel in China (Beijing-Chifeng, Inner Mongolia): $1,200 $300 per student x 4 students Accommodation (hotel and food): $8,000 $100 per day x 20 =$ 2000 per student x 4 students Fieldwork supplies: $400 1 Fieldwork assistant in China: $100 per day x 20 $2,000

TOTAL ($4,500.00 per student) $18,000

GRAND TOTAL $184,910

14 2010-11 Biology VPUE Departmental Grant Proposal

Part One: The research program's goals and basic organizational structure The VPUE Summer Research Program for first- and second-year undergraduates aims to provide students with the opportunity to participate in the exciting research projects covering a wide range of topics within the field of biology. Students are expected to learn the fundamentals of basic research, including, but not limited to: identifying a question to be studied; formulating an hypothesis designed to shed light on the question; mastering and utilizing materials and methods to test the hypothesis; collecting and analyzing data; interpreting the results; suggesting further experiments; amassing and organizing relevant literature concerning the area of study. Tenure- track faculty members designate specific projects for this program, and choose their student participants based on an online application and ranking system. As part of their grant contract, all students are strongly encouraged to apply to participate in the annual SURPS Undergraduate Symposium in the Autumn quarter immediately following the summer of research.

Part Two: Recruitment plans and selection criteria for faculty mentors, or a description of the fit between the mentors/projects and the program goals if the former have already been selected We have been lucky enough not to need a faculty recruitment plan for summer research opportunities for undergraduates. Staff email faculty in the department to ask them if they are willing to sponsor a student/s and request detailed descriptions of the project/s. Faculty willingly volunteer to do this; they enjoy helping budding scientists, and undergraduate researchers are an important, and for some faculty, critical part of their research programs. Faculty provide space in their labs or field sites, and provide mentoring themselves as well as mentoring from other lab members. We ask students to apply to their top four labs/projects and then have faculty review and select students.

Part Three: List of specific project objectives and student responsibilities There are a total of 54 research projects proposed for Summer 2011, accommodating up to 92 students. Among these projects, there are 16 Field Studies Programs, 28 Summer Research in Biology programs, and 10 Student-Initiated Programs. Field Studies Programs (FSP) take place off campus, and Summer Research in Biology programs (SRB) and Student-Initiated Programs (SIP) take place on the main Stanford campus, at Jasper Ridge Biological Preserve, or at Hopkins Marine Station. Student responsibilities in these projects range from assisting with continuing long-term projects, conducting experiments in the lab combined with literature review, and collecting field samples followed by analysis in the lab, to name a few.

Summary of Field Studies Program opportunities Profs. Deborah Gordon, William Gilly, Gretchen Daily, Fiorenza Micheli, Tadashi Fukami, Carol Boggs, Rodolfo Dirzo Peter Vitousek, Ward Watt and Elizabeth Hadly may accept up to 31 students in projects all over the world. Field sites include Palmyra Atoll, Rocky Mountain Biological Laboratory in Colorado, Arizona’s Southwestern Research Station, the Smithsonian in Washington DC, and ecosystems in Hawaii, Mexico, Costa Rica and Tanzania.

Projects include the ecological impact of fishing (Micheli), population biology of an introduced butterfly (Boggs), the role of large and often threatened animals in tropical coral reef ecosystems (Micheli), agriculture in pre-contact Hawaii (Vitousek), and quantifying economic and societal benefits of conservation (Daily) Many FSP projects involve quantifying flora and fauna, and heavy use of statistical analyses.

Methodologies involved will span molecular biology to ecological observations of interacting plants, animals, and soil. Specific techniques include small animal trapping, insect trapping, and plant surveys (Dirzo), behavioral observation of ants examining their vulnerability to food scarcity (Gordon), and using morphometrics or phylochronology to investigate phenotypic and genetic responses to climatic change through time (Hadly).

Summary of Summer Research in Biology opportunities Profs. William Gilly, Jan Skotheim, Mary Beth Mudgett, George Somero, Dominique Bergmann, Craig Heller, Russ Fernald, Fiorenza Micheli, Tadashi Fukami, Hunter Fraser, Liqun Luo, Phil Hanawalt, Martha Cyert, Ashby Morrison, Susan McConnell, Barbara Block, Virginia Walbot, Ward Watt, and Robert Sapolsky will have space for up to 51 students next summer.

Projects include examining the effects of oxygen availability on both the evolution of organismal size (Skotheim) as well as the Monterey Bay ecosystem (Gilly), predicting the effects of climate change on intertidal animals (Somero),social behavior and mating choices of fish (Fernald) the role of DNA mutation in Cockayne syndrome (Hanawalt), and examining the effects of mutant calcineurin, a conserved protein required for yeast cells to survive physical stress (Cyert), to name just a few.

Methodologies will include high-throughput RNA sequencing (Fraser), the use of GABA agonists to rescue memory, brain lesions, and behavioral studies (Heller), as a few examples. There are many projects utilizing multidisciplinary approaches. For example, 1) molecular, cellular and/or genetic methods to explore the mechanisms of brain development using the laboratory mouse as a model system (McConnell) 2) laboratory, field, and paleontological data to examine the role of oxygen availability on the evolution of organismal size (Skotheim), and 3) biochemical, cell biological, and genetic approaches to examine host-pathogen interactions in tomato plants (Mudgett).

Summary of Student-Initiated Projects program If possible, we reserve 10 funded positions for declared Biology majors who wish to carry out research with faculty outside Biology. Generally, they are faculty in the School of Medicine. The faculty who have received multiple numbers of SIP-funded students are Anne Brunet (Genetics, aging research), Martin Brown (Radiation Oncology, resistance of tumors to cancer therapies), David Axelrod (Pathology, development of cellular asymmetry), Donna Bouley (Comparative Medicine, host-pathogen interactions in infectious disease), and Richard Reimer (Neurology, neurotransmitter metabolism).

Part Four: Plans for student recruitment and selection, as well as the means by which students will be matched with mentors

A list of faculty projects, with details of the projects and the commitment expected of students is posted online, typically by the second week of Winter quarter. Off-campus (Field Studies Program, FSP) on-campus (Summer Research in Biology, SRB), and Student-Initiated Program (SIP) opportunities are listed at http://www.stanford.edu/dept/biology/biohonors/funded_summer_research.html

The department targets freshmen and sophomores via emails to 1) the Biology major and biointerest mailing lists, 2) Earth Systems’ mailing list, 3) Humbio majors mailing list and 3) both Bio and Humbio core lecture students, which enroll close to 1,000 students combined. In addition, BioBridge peer advisors meet one-on-one with students interested in pursuing summer research during drop-in hours in the student services office.

Student applications consist of academic and background information (e.g., major, GPA, etc.) as well as a short essay on why the students wish to participate. Students may choose as many as 4 projects, and applications are due in mid-February. Applications are then forwarded to faculty, who typically select students for interviews based on academic preparation and interest. Faculty choices are generally set by mid-April.

Part Five: Specific student assignments, deliverables, or presentations  All students that receive a VPUE grant sign a contract acknowledging the expectation that they present their research in some format. Specifically, students are strongly encouraged to apply for SURPS, which is a UAR research symposium offered in October of each year, but students have opportunities to present in lab meetings and at the annual departmental honors symposium.  10-12 week commitment (unless the project specifically calls for less time) to participating fully as a member of the lab group during summer quarter: regular attendance in lab and at lab meetings, learning techniques, reading related literature, etc.  Students who do not present their work at the autumn SURPS Symposium generally do so at the discretion of their advisors. Therefore, though we encourage participation, we cannot require it.

Part Six: Strategies for providing mentorship, including 1) training and resources available to new or inexperienced mentors, and 2) guidance, resources, and feedback available to students  Senior faculty in the department actively mentor new/inexperienced research mentors. In addition, faculty members are provided with a list of resources provided by CTL.  Student services staff, academic advisors, staff at the UAR, and lab members all provide assistance to summer research students – prior to applying, during the application process, during the quarter in the lab, and following completion of the summer project.

Part Seven: Outcomes of past programs (if applicable) and ideas for improvement of student experiences (especially important if you have previously received VPUE funding) One hundred-one (101) Stanford students participated in Grinnell College’s SURE II (Survey of Undergraduate Research Experiences) in 2008. Of those, 81 (80%) indicated that their funding source was “Department” or “Other,” with named sources being UAR grants and VPUE. Sixty- one (60%) of respondents were female, with 10 (10%) self-identifying as underrepresented minority. Thirty-two (32%) reported no prior research experience, while 20 (22%) “now plan Ph.D. in science field” after their experience. Forty-seven (52%) intend to pursue a medical degree.

On a scale of 1 (lowest) to 5 (highest), Stanford students reported an average 3.56 (SD 1.06) in gaining clarification of a career path, 4.32 (SD 0.89) in understanding the research process, and 3.53 (SD 1.10) in gaining self-confidence. 82% reported that the research experience met or exceeded expectation, with 31% reported it “much better than I expected.” 78% felt their immediate supervisor was above average, with 50% reporting their immediate supervisor was an outstanding teacher and mentor. Almost 85% said they were “likely” or “very likely” to choose another research experience.

From these data, we conclude that our summer research program has a significant, positive impact on students’ academic education and future career plans.

From 2003-2009, Biology has offered 373 summer research experiences using VPUE funds. Of those, 35 (9%) students received funding twice from the Biology Departmental grant. With the prior experience afforded by their VPUE funded experience, 110 (25%) went onto earn major grants (three of them earning two grants each), of which 49 (13%) were HHMI awards.

Of the 226 VPUE-funded students who have graduated to date, 87 (38%) graduated with honors in Biology. This is on par with the percentage of total Biology majors who graduate with honors (usually 40%). However, since 38 (17%) were not Biology majors at the time they received funding, the percentage of VPUE-funded students who graduate with honors may be as high as 55%. Ten of the VPUE-funded students who have graduated won Firestone awards in Biology, at least two have been awarded CTL’s award for Excellence in Presentation, two have won the Kennedy award in the Natural Sciences (all 2 offered by the university to date), and at least one was named a Fulbright scholar.

As students who are awarded these experiences are primarily sophomores, our long-term outcome data since 2003 is limited. Data from the Stanford Alumni website, where students self-report post-graduation information (unless they continue on in other Stanford programs, whereupon data is automatically entered) offer minimum numbers for long-term outcomes. Of the 226 graduates, 42 (19%) went on to a master’s degree in a science, technology, or engineering field, 16 (7%) are in PhD programs, 14 (6%) have gone on to medical school, and 2 (1%) have entered MD/PhD programs, and many are working. Interestingly, more of those who report themselves as working are analysts for industry or policy rather than as K-12 educators.

For summer 2009, there were 57 VPUE-funded slots and 98 applicants; for summer 2010, there were 56 VPUE-funded slots and 166 applicants. Clearly, we could not accommodate them all. Graduating Biology seniors are asked to fill out a Senior Exit Survey. We ask whether or not students performed research, and if not, why. Some respondents wrote that they felt they needed more research experience to secure a slot in the first place, while others chose not to do so primarily because they lacked the time and/or interest. While there is little Biology can do to address students’ lack of time, we have two initiatives to address the other issues.

The first is our Explorations program, piloted in AY 2008-09. This program invites interested graduate students and postdoctoral fellows (“instructors”) to pick a topic related to the ongoing Biology undergraduate core courses and to develop a two-hour hands-on learning module for that topic. Students sign-up for these modules and engage in them for the learning experience – no academic credit is granted. It affords them the opportunity to receive a research lesson without the commitment of a large chunk of time. In 2009, 20 Explorations were offered involving 25 instructors and 137 undergraduates. Student evaluations were positive and emphasized that Explorations met students’ desires to have more hands-on, experimental learning opportunities. Over 93% of the students that took an Exploration were interested in participating in another Exploration in the future.

A second, more comprehensive initiative is being developed and was officially piloted during AY 2009-2010. A department goal is to completely re-invent our core laboratory courses that serve all of the Biology majors, most of the Human Biology majors, and virtually all pre-med students at Stanford. The current laboratory courses are dated, not inquiry-based, and do not introduce students to modern biology as they will experience in faculty laboratories.

Our model for the re-invention is an inquiry-based laboratory course designed and delivered for 3 years by Drs. Tim Stearns and Martha Cyert (BIOSCI 54/55). That laboratory course used yeast to investigate the effects of a variety of environmental toxins. The answers were unknown, and the students worked in teams to discover how a particular agent was affecting their cells. The students learned current genetic and genomic approaches and used state of the art laboratory techniques. This was a highly popular and successful series of courses that was only able to accommodate 1/5 of the students interested in taking it.

In 2009-10 we completed pilots of these new approaches to the two core laboratory courses that we hope will eventually serve all of the students. The first two courses offered served as templates for future courses that will always be asking new questions. Expectations are that at least 20% of undergrads will continue on and do a full year project or an honors project, which they were not planning to do at the time of enrollment.

With these two initiatives, students will be able to perform research as part of their core curriculum, as well as a 2-hour Exploration. Thus, eventually all students will be able to apply for VPUE-funded slots with some research experience behind them. They will also have the opportunity to find out whether they enjoy research in the first place during the regular curriculum, thus increasing student interest in conducting research.

VPUE Departmental Grant - Biology 2010-2011 Academic Year

Item Description

51 students (SRB) and 10 students (SIP) total at rate of $5,600 for 10, 11, 12 week internships. Amount is Student Stipends (SRB students) prorated for internships lasting less than 10 weeks $341,600 31 students total at rate of $5,600 for 10, 11, 12 week internships. Amount is prorated for internships lasting Student Stipends (FSP students) less than 10 weeks $71,320

travel to and lodging at various locations including Palmyra Atoll, Rocky Mountain Biological Laboratory in Colorado, Arizona’s Southwestern Research Station, Student Travel & Lodging Expenses Washington DC, Hawaii, Mexico, Costa Rica and (FSP students) Tanzania. Paid as part of student's stipend $94,694 Project Materials & Supplies (FSP students) Maximum of $500 per student $13,475 Other Program Expenses n/a $0

GRAND TOTAL $521,089 STANFORD UNIVERSITY, STANFORD, CA 94305

T. DANIEL P. STACK PHONE: (650) 725-8736 ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR OF CHEMISTRY FAX: (650) 725-0259 DEPARTMENT OF CHEMISTRY EMAIL: [email protected] October 1, 2010

To: Deans of Research and H&S From: Department of Chemistry; Undergraduate Curriculum Committee Re: Summer 2011: Undergraduate Research Fellowship in Chemistry:

Project Title: Undergraduate Summer Research Fellowships in Chemistry

Project Authors: Chemistry Department

Level of support: $120,200 total costs (assumes a maximum 10-week stipend of $5600): 18 fellowships @ $6600 -- $5600 stipend + $1000 research support 1 mentor dinner @ $1000 (~ 40 participants) 4 student "chalk talk" lunches ($400)

Research Program Goals: The objective of this proposal is to enhance the opportunities for Stanford undergraduates to participate in independent research at the forefront of science with faculty in the Chemistry Department. In past 17 years, our undergraduate summer research program has grown into a vibrant and essential part of our undergraduate program, as nearly 60% of our graduating chemistry majors now participate. The ability to experience an intensive research environment uninterrupted by other academic concerns is noted by many majors as a highlight in their careers, providing critical insights for planning their future.

Research program structure and organization (mentoring, timeline, program size, planned group activities): Individual faculty members and their graduate students (or post doctoral associates) will be responsible for mentoring, and all the students will be accommodated within the laboratories in the Chemistry Department or in the laboratories of courtesy Chemistry faculty members. The direct faculty interaction with undergraduates in a research environment is one of the most important and valuable aspects of this program.

We propose to offer 18 undergraduate fellowships to support independent research over the 10 weeks in the summer of 2011, coinciding with the Summer Research College. In the summer of 2010, 18 students were involved in the program, 13.5 funded from the VPUE departmental grant, 4 funded from VPUE major grants, and 0.5 funded from an outside source. Our request for 18 positions is identical to that supported in 2007 through our VPUE Departmental grant, a time with fewer majors. The addition of the biological chemistry track within the major has resulted in a highly oversubscribed program; many majors applied for a UAR major grants last year to increase their chances of a summer research position.

In 1997, we requested a $1000 supplies stipend per student to help defray the day-to-day costs in the laboratories, which was a reasonable estimate at that time. The current request of $1000/student no longer covers these costs, yet the department would prefer to provide more student opportunities than to fully recover research costs.

$1600 is requested to support social activities, which include a mentor dinner hosted by the undergraduate students ($1000) and 4 student "chalk talk" lunches ($400).

Plan for faculty and administrative oversight of the program Our summer program is highly structured, if not the most structured on campus; concurrent enrollment in classes for credit is not allowed as it conflicts with our stated mission of an intensive research experience unfettered by other academic concerns. The management and oversight of the program is handled completely by faculty members.

Description of the research or scholarly activities in which students will be engaged Each student will be required to detail their scientific progress from their projects through a final report, a group seminar, and a poster at the Undergraduate Research Symposium in October.

Procedures and requirements for recruitment of students and faculty The fellowships will be announced in mid-February through Chem 111, a weekly informal seminar class in the winter quarter given by ~15 different faculty members/courtesy faculty in the Chemistry department. Announcements are made in other chemistry classes offered in the winter quarter (Chem 33, Chem 131, Chem 132). The students submit a short proposal (2-3 pages), a transcript, and a nominating letter from their faculty sponsor to a selection committee composed of three chemistry faculty members. The proposals are due the first week of the Spring quarter, as the prior two weeks are generally too busy for both the professors and students. The awards are based on scientific merit and on the educational impact of the proposed project. Special consideration and efforts will be undertaken to encourage minority students to participate in the program.

Student Deliverables Each fellowship requires an initial proposal written by the applicant (2-3 pages), a formal seminar in their respective group (20-30 minutes), a final report (5-10 pages), and participation in the SURPS. Writing a proposal introduces the student to the process of formulating a scientific question and determining an approach to its solution. Effectively communicating research results in the form of a seminar, formal report, and poster presentation is a very important learning process for our students.

Plan for program evaluation and evolution We find that direct interaction with students in social settings has provided the most instructive feedback for program improvement. For the past several summers, the students have organized and hosted a very successful mentor dinner. The students organize this entire event from the food planning to the site- preparation and cleanup. The student "chalk talk" lunch in which two or three students will present a 5- 10 minute "chalk talk" (no powerpoint) to explain their research in the simplest terms will be restructured in the summer of 2011. Four such meetings will be held, but next year each meeting will have direct oversight by at least one faculty member.

Summer of 2010:

18 Students Last Name email ID major Faculty Funding Bohnhoff [email protected] 5257787 Chemistry Cegelski VPUE Departmental Vinh [email protected] 5524545 Chemistry Dai VPUE Departmental Scherer [email protected] 5509468 Chemistry Du Bois Novartis/VPUE Departmental Bui [email protected] 5523449 Chemistry Kanan UAR Major Grant Birer [email protected] 5523051 Chemistry Kanan VPUE Departmental Chang [email protected] 5601156 Chemistry Moerner VPUE Departmental Cronkite-Ratcliff [email protected] 5579610 Comp Sci Pande VPUE Departmental Pruks [email protected] 5531289 Chemistry Trost VPUE Departmental Lee [email protected] 5239166 Chemistry Wandless VPUE Departmental Nguyen [email protected] 5576246 ChemEng Zare VPUE Departmental Hemphill [email protected] 5580593 ND Zare VPUE Departmental Cho [email protected] 5615351 Chemistry Stack VPUE Departmental Silva [email protected] 5634069 Chemistry Khosla VPUE Departmental Tenney [email protected] 5579619 ND Waymouth VPUE Departmental Edward [email protected] 5460692 Biology Waymouth VPUE Departmental Jacobson [email protected] 5456976 Chemistry Cegelski UAR Major Grant Chaijarasphong [email protected] 5481206 Chemistry Cui UAR Major Grant Roberts [email protected] 5459738 Chemistry Du Bois UAR Major Grant

Copies of the student's final research reports are available upon request.

2010-2011 Request for Funding VPUE Departmental Grants for Undergraduate Research October 12, 2010

Introduction In response to the Vice Provost’s call for proposals, the Center for International Security and Cooperation (CISAC) is applying for renewed funding for its Undergraduate Research Internship Program. CISAC is asking for $24,020 to enable us to support 6 interns per academic quarter for academic year 2010-2011.

As part of its commitment to training the next generation of security specialists, the Center for International Security and Cooperation (CISAC), with the financial assistance of the Vice Provost for Undergraduate Education, created a new program to provide undergraduates with greater opportunities to carry out research in security studies in April of 2001. CISAC’s Internship Program continues to thrive since its establishment and we believe that it warrants continued support. From its inception through today, the Undergraduate Research Internship Program at CISAC has placed 169 students in internships with CISAC faculty and senior researchers in international security studies. Demand for the program remains high and with the assistance of VPUE funding, we were able to hire 11 students in academic year 2009-2010. Students’ research included timely and important topics such as the history of terrorist groups in Iraq, risk/benefit analysis of ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, geopolitics of Pakistan, Indian counterterrorism policy, organization aspects of climate change, and nuclear weapons policy and the causes of nuclear proliferation.

CISAC and Undergraduate Training in International Security Studies CISAC has a long history of including undergraduate education as part of its core activities. The Center itself developed from a team-taught interdisciplinary course in the 1970s on arms control and disarmament. CISAC continues to offer POLISCI 114S/IPS 241, entitled “International Security in a Changing World,” on a yearly basis, and several of the Center’s faculty and researchers teach undergraduate courses in security-related areas, such as MS&E 193, “Technology and National Security”; the Sophomore College class, POLISCI 10SC, “American Foreign Policy and the Challenges of the 21st Century”; and POLISCI 113F, “The United Nations and Global Governance”. The Faculty Senate approved the establishment of CISAC’s interschool honors program in international security studies in May 2000 and has since, in 2009, reviewed the program and granted a five-year renewal of its operation through 2014. CISAC’s undergraduate honors program invites applicants from any school or major in the university to participate in a two-week honors college conducted in Washington DC, take a year-long research seminar in security studies, serve an internship with a security-related organization, and write an honors thesis. Ten cohorts of students (a total of 114) have graduated from the program thus far and include majors from such diverse fields as Political Science, English, Jewish Studies, Chemical Engineering, Computer Science, Biology, International Relations, Management Science & Engineering, Physics, Psychology, Math, Human Biology and Economics.

The Undergraduate Research Internship Program strengthens CISAC’s ability to fulfill its obligation to train young scholars in international security studies in three ways. First, the program introduces students to what constitutes serious research in security studies; how to identify a policy-relevant puzzle, create a research design, and find and analyze data. Second, by providing undergraduates with the opportunity to work on an individual basis with faculty and senior researchers, the program creates mentoring relationships that can extend far beyond the time that the student works with the scholars. Third, by opening up the world of security research to undergraduates at an early stage in their undergraduate years, and by training them to identify good research topics, the program strengthens CISAC’s honors program.

The CISAC Internship Program In the past, the program has made up to 15 research internships available each academic quarter. Undergraduate assistants work closely with one faculty member or senior researcher in a mentoring relationship. Interns work on existing research programs and are expected to fulfill key aspects of research. Students worked on a range of projects and a variety of tasks, including data collection and analysis, surveying and abstracting of key literature, and reporting on seminars and conferences. Interns are encouraged to be regular participants in Center research activities, including weekly research colloquia and seminars, conferences, and special lectures. In addition to their regular internships, several students also serve as rapporteurs for CISAC’s regular seminar series in the social sciences and technical issues. In response to suggestions from past interns that they would benefit from interaction with their cohort, CISAC now provides one or two intern lunches open to all current interns. These lunches also provide the opportunity for the interns to give direct feedback to the faculty coordinator.

The program is open to all undergraduates from any school or major. Applications are accepted on a rolling basis to Amy S. Koh, the Fellowship and Student Programs Coordinator responsible for undergraduate programs at CISAC. Amy then works with the faculty coordinator of the intern program, who then endeavors to match students with CISAC faculty and researchers in their field of interest. Although there are no strict course prerequisites, students who have taken POLISCI 114S /IPS 241, “International Security in A Changing World”, are given priority. Although preference is given to underclass undergraduates as a means of providing experience for possible honors candidates, seniors are eligible to participate. Research internships can be renewed on a quarterly basis up to a year, on the mutual preference of the mentor and the student. In order to balance the interests of students and mentors who may benefit from a longer internship with the desire to make available internships to all qualified applicants, mentors and students who wish to continue research internships beyond a year are considered based on availability of opportunities and applicants. As per direction of the Undergraduate Advisory Council, priority is granted to non-visiting CISAC affiliates as mentors.

Student Product At the beginning of the research internship, the student is expected to discuss with the research mentor and agree upon a suitable research product commensurate with the work that the student does. The student product can take a number of forms including, but not limited to: a research paper that contributes substantially to the project that the researcher directs; a series of abstracts and critiques of existing literature in the project area which are then discussed with the mentor in

2 tutorial; a report or series of reports based on research presentations and seminars; a conference report; or the creation of a new data set or annotated bibliography in a field.

Enhancement of Current Undergraduate Opportunities at CISAC Before the creation of the Internship Program, opportunities for undergraduates to work at CISAC were limited. CISAC faculty and researchers would occasionally employ undergraduate assistants, but these opportunities were hostage to funds available. Usually, when research assistantships are included in foundation grants, priority is given to graduate students, and therefore opportunities for undergraduates are limited. The Internship Program has encouraged undergraduates to carry out research on security issues. Indicative of student interest is that applications outnumber the positions that are available.

We expect that many underclass undergraduates who serve as research interns will eventually apply for admission into the CISAC honors program. Of the 14 interns chosen in Spring and Summer 2001, 6 applied to the honors program. During the 2001-2002 academic year, 10 juniors served as interns and 8 applied to the following year’s honors program; in 2002-2003 of the 19 interns, 8 applied to the honors program; in 2003-2004 of the 11 interns, 6 applied to the honors program; in 2004-2005 of the 17 interns, 6 applied to the honors program; in the 2006 calendar year of the 28 interns, 9 applied to the honors program; in the 2007 calendar year, of the 31 interns, 9 applied to the honors program; in the 2008 calendar year, of the 16 interns, 8 applied to the honors program; in the 2009 academic year, of the 20 interns, 4 applied to the honors program; and in the 2010 academic year, of the 11 interns, 2 applied to the honors program.

The Honors program benefits from greater numbers of applicants, as well as applicants who are better prepared to carry out independent research based on their experience of assisting established experts in security studies. Scott Sagan, Co-Director of CISAC, and the 2006-07 Director of the Honors Program has extensive experience advising honors theses and running honors colleges, and notes that one of the biggest hurdles undergraduates face in writing honors theses is identifying important, policy puzzles amenable to academic research. We believe that research interns develop a better ability to identify research topics for honors theses. Through the internship, undergraduates gain a sense of what the key research debates are in their field and what key lacunae exist in their areas of interest.

Evaluation At the end of individual internships, the director of the program meets with the faculty member to discuss his/her experience. Faculty enthusiasm for the program remains high as evidenced by the strong rate at which mentors continue to request interns. For our interns, we use the on-line evaluations administered by the URP. In 2007, the CISAC evaluations received a perfect 4 score on “learned valuable research skills” and “professor took the time to make sure I learned.” Such reports then provide feedback for improving the program. In the past, we have made three improvements to the program based on faculty and student feedback. We have made sure to integrate the interns into all seminars and conferences held at CISAC and will require all interns to attend at least one seminar; we have set up luncheons so that interns can meet each other and the director of the program; and we have set up the summer internships so that prospective honors students can benefit from mentoring at a distance.

3 Budget For the 2010-2011 academic year, we propose to create 6 research internships per academic quarter (excluding the summer quarter). While CISAC faculty and senior researchers have shown increased interest in the Undergraduate Research Internship Program, some faculty members have been able to add undergraduate research assistants to their own research grants. At the same time, CISAC is taking into consideration the reduced funding offered by VPUE due to budget constraints and, as a result, the Center is decreasing the amount of VPUE-funded research internships per quarter it will provide this academic year. Based on these factors and on calculations from previous years, CISAC anticipates a projected expense of $24,020 for academic year 2010-2011. We would like to fund 6 students for three academic quarters each, working a maximum of 10 hours per week over a total of 28 weeks (three quarters). This amounts to a projected expense of $23,520. Finally, we are asking for a small additional amount of funds to be spent on intern lunches and special programs. Thus, the total amount requested for the 2010-2011 academic year is $24,020 (attached Appendix outlines our proposed budget).

4 Appendix – Budget

Center for International Security and Cooperation (CISAC) Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies 616 Serra Street, Encina Hall 2nd Floor Stanford, California 94305-6165

Vice Provost for Undergraduate Education

Budget 2010-2011

Research Internships 6 Internships in Fall, Winter, and Spring Quarters (28 weeks; 10 hours per week; $14.00 per hour) $23,520

Other

Research-related Expenses and Intern Lunches $500

TOTAL $24,020

5 STANFORD CENTER FOR THE STUDY OF POVERTY AND INEQUALITY

VPUE Departmental Grant for Undergraduate Research: 2010-2011 Stanford Center for the Study of Poverty and Inequality

THE CENTER GOALS: The Stanford Center for the Study of Poverty and Inequality is continuing its program to study poverty and inequality in the United States. Our efforts are designed to understand the causes and consequences of poverty, promote multidisciplinary research on poverty and public policy, foster expertise and interest among young scholars, as well as mentor and train the next generation of poverty researchers. We work in a collaborative and team-based fashion, bringing together faculty members, graduate students post-doctoral research fellows, visiting scholars, and undergraduate research assistants (often across a number of disciplines) to work on specific research projects.

With this proposal we are looking to hire 6 undergraduate research assistants to help with six different directed research projects during the 2010-2011 academic year. Our expectation is that students will assist with (1) collecting and interpreting ethnographic data, (2) conducting and transcribing face-to-face interviews, (3) carrying out statistical analyses, (4) generating graphics to illustrate research results, (5) designing and running laboratory experiments, (6) conducting library research on core concepts and substantive theories, and (7) assisting in the writing of research reports.

ADVISING AND MENTORING: Our program is designed to provide undergraduate students with a substantial research experience under the guidance and direction of a few, carefully selected faculty mentors. The faculty who direct research projects in this program are committed to provide students with the conceptual tools that are necessary to understand each project, train them in the methodological skills that they will be required to use in the course of their work, and advise them on the day-to-day aspects of conducting social scientific research. The extent of such training and the exact nature of the supervision will be carefully adjusted to meet the interests and the qualifications of each student.

Practically speaking, however, our mentors meet with students individually on a weekly basis to discuss their progress, provide them with feedback on their work, reflect on the research project, and discuss specific assignments and tasks for the following week. Additionally, we expect our students to participate in our regularly scheduled project team meetings, where they are asked to report on their individual progress and share problems or difficulties that they may have encountered during their work. And, finally, we encourage them to act as peer advisors to one another by requiring that they meet as a group at least once per quarter and participate in the mini research conference that the Sociology Department offers annually to their undergraduate research assistants.

With this multi-pronged mentorship approach, we seek to encourage students to challenge themselves, learn how to work as a team, interact meaningfully with their mentor/s, and learn important scientific and problem-solving skills. The overarching goal is to expose students to the reality of academic scholarship early in their undergraduate years thereby providing them with a richer educational experience and making them more competitive for advanced undergraduate research, graduate school, and industry jobs.

Over the years we have had considerable success in teaching, training, and collaborating with undergraduate students. Last year, for example, two of our VPUE-funded students made such a huge impression on our faculty mentors that they were invited to co-author a book chapter based on their research. Another student evaluated her experience with us by saying, “Working as a research assistant with the SCSPI has been extremely valuable. SCSPI has allowed me to improve my research skills, work with well-known Stanford professors, and deepen my interest in poverty issues facing our country.”

2010-2011 RESEARCH PROJECTS:

The research projects proposed here will be administratively managed by Szonja Szelényi (Associate Director, Stanford Center for the Study of Poverty and Inequality) and Alice Chou (Administrative Associate, Stanford Center for the Study of Poverty and Inequality). Substantively, our students will be working on one of the following six research projects:

1. Measuring Economic Distress in San Francisco

Project Leaders: David Grusky (faculty mentor), Emily Ryo (graduate student), and Chris Wimer (Associate Director of Collaboration for Poverty Research).

As the Great Recession has unfolded, accounts in the mass media and in everyday life tell us that hardship and economic distress have been increasing dramatically. Stories abound of families whose members have lost jobs, can no longer make housing payments, lost health insurance and access to affordable health care, and who struggle to put food on the table. Yet, beyond journalistic and anecdotal evidence, official statistics have so far told us very little about exactly how much economic hardship and distress is increasing, and whether it shows any signs of abating.

This project provides a novel attempt at filling this gap. We have combed administrative and public data to assemble 11 monthly indicators that tap various dimensions of economic distress in San Francisco. These indicators include, among others: requests for temporary cash assistance, petitions for help with housing costs, bankruptcies, food stamps applications, food pantry visits, MediCal registrations, enrolments for health care services, foreclosures, as well as unemployment. With these indicators in hand, we are now in a position to create a distress index for the San Francisco and to track changes in distress levels over time.

RA Responsibilities: Students assigned to this project will be responsible for compiling distress indicators (e.g., bankruptcies, food stamp applications), building an index from them, carrying out a relevant literature review, extending our work cities (Los Angeles, Oakland, and beyond), and assisting in writing final reports.

2. Is There a Flexibility Stigma? Flexible Work Arrangements and the Plight of Women in the Workplace

Project leader and faculty mentor: Shelley Correll (Sociology)

Two recent trends in the U.S. workplace stand in odd relation to each other. On one hand, workplaces are more likely today than in the recent past to offer flexible workplace arrangement to their employees, especially to their professional employees. Yet, on the other hand, managerial and professional workers are working increasingly long hours. For women, who have long been saddled with balancing both career and the primary duties of childrearing, flexibility is key to achieving equality with men. But only if they can safely use it. This project examines, using an innovative experimental design, whether women suffer from a stigma attached to the actual utilization of flexible work arrangements.

Student responsibilities will include running experimental sessions, assisting with scheduling and data entry, and designing experimental materials and procedures. Students will meet weekly with their faculty mentor as well as members of the research team to discuss research design and methods.

3. Food Insecurity in the Bay Area

Project Leaders: David Grusky (faculty mentor) and Chris Wimer (Associate Director of Collaboration for Poverty Research)

One of the most disturbing and extraordinary aspects of life in this wealthy country is the persistence of hunger. Skipping dinner. Eating less. Eating less well. Giving up food entirely in order to pay rent. This is what thousands of people in San Francisco and Marin face every day. The objective of this project is to understand the dynamics of food insecurity in the Bay Area. To do this, we will use publicly available data to describe the extent of the gap between the millions of pounds of food that is provided by the San Francisco Food Bank and the ever-growing need for food assistance among the poor and the near-poor in our community. We propose to develop an estimate of the unmet need by borrowing an existing methodology employed by researchers working for Food Lifeline in Washington State. The goal is to accurately capture the volume of unmet need and to provide guidelines for a better match between food provision and need.

Research assistants assigned to this project will be introduced to the statistical package STATA, will conduct statistical analyses and model the relationship between key variables. They will also graph key results, and assist in the writing of the final report.

4. Recession Ethnographies

Project Leaders: Marianne Cooper (Post-Doctoral Research Fellow, Michelle R. Clayman Institute for Gender Research), David Grusky (faculty mentor), and Chris Wimer (Associate Director of Collaboration for Poverty Research)

Just as personal narratives were collected during and after the Great Depression of the 1930s to record, for posterity, the atmosphere, experience, and social impact of the times, we seek, in this study, to record oral histories from the Great Recession. We believe, given the sheer scale and historical nature of the economic downturn that began in 2008, that it is extremely important to capture people’s stories of their experience in one of the most momentous economic collapses of our time. Towards this end, we would like to build a website which explains our project and encourages people to submit, via video upload, audio upload, email, phone, or regular mail their personal accounts of the recession. We expect that we would provide interested participants with several questions to guide their submission such as the following: Tell us about your experience during the Great Recession? How have you managed to get by during the economic downturn? Who and what have you relied on? How do you feel that this recession has changed your outlook on life? We expect to widely publicize our oral history project through newspapers, community centers, and other media sources. We hope for a very robust response sufficient to create a large database of oral history data that current and future scholars could use to study the Great Recession.

Student Responsibilities will include helping to build a website that can accommodate the collection of Great Recession “stories,” assisting in the gathering of ethnographic data, and analyzing ethnographic evidence. 5. The Great Recession Taskforce

Project Leaders: Esra Burak (graduate student), Erin Cumberworth (graduate student), Lindsay Owens (graduate student), Luigi Pistaferri (faculty mentor), Rob Reich (faculty mentor).

It is widely acknowledged that the current recession, often dubbed the Great Recession, will prove to be the deepest and most challenging economic downturn since the Great Depression. Although there has been much discussion of the causes of the fiscal crisis and subsequent downturn, we know surprisingly little about its social and economic impact and how that impact is being borne by different population groups. Who, for example, is most likely to be unemployed, to face foreclosure, to go into debt, to cut back on basic consumption items (e.g., healthy food), to suffer health setbacks (perhaps via prescription drugs that cannot any longer be afforded), even to go without food? Are blacks, immigrants, and the less educated suffering especially? Or is this, as some have suggested, a recession that is unusually broad in its impact, forcing many formerly privileged and middle class workers into dire circumstances? And how is the population reacting to this sudden and unprecedented downturn in its economic and social situation? The Great Depression, many have argued, was borne relatively well by a “hardened” population with ample reservoirs of experience in coping with economic and other stressors. Is the current U.S. population, raised as it was during a period of unprecedented prosperity and consumption, rather less prepared for sacrifice and hard times? Are divorces, suicides, even murders increasing? Are some population groups, perhaps even the poor, bearing the downturn especially well given their prior experience with economic stress?

The purpose of this task force, then, is to develop and disseminate a comprehensive package of social indicators that (1) monitors how the pain of the recession is being distributed across different population groups, and (2) charts in revealing ways the main trends in social and economic inequality over the course of the downturn. We will do so by building and elaborating on many of the indicators released by the Bureau of Labor Statistics while also drawing on data from a host of other (often quite unexploited) resources. The recession indicators will be divided into eight core domains: labor force (e.g., unemployment rates, involuntarily working part-time); income and earnings (e.g., income inequality); wealth, savings, and consumption (e.g., wealth inequality, savings rates); schooling and training (e.g., college graduation rates); demographic outcomes (e.g., divorce); attitudes (e.g., confidence in economic institutions); behavioral responses and lifestyles (e.g., alcoholism, church-going, suicide), and philanthropic activity (e.g., charitable giving).

The research assistants working on this project will updating time series data on charitable giving and consumption for the new recession website and will also assist in the writing of a research report.

6. Alternative Payday Lending Practices

Project Leaders: David Grusky (faculty mentor) and Chris Wimer (Associate Director of Collaboration for Poverty Research)

Loan sharking is the practice of lending money to economically stressed (typically low-income) people at extremely high and illegal rates of interest. These often come in the form of so-called payday loans. Predatory check cashing establishments (conveniently located in low-income neighborhoods) let people write them a post-dated check for the amount of the requested loan, plus a hefty fee to cover lending services. Such fees can amount to 400% APR. Loan sharks like these prey on people with limited means and encourage them to live paycheck to paycheck. San Francisco is currently taking the lead in the country in providing a healthy alternative to payday loans. In December of 2009 Mayor Gavin Newsom launched Payday Plus SF, which is a program aimed to undercut loan sharking in the Bay Area.

The objective of this project is to evaluate Mayor Newsom’s payday loan program initiative. We propose to do this by addressing the following seven questions:

• Who is using Payday Plus? How poor are the users? How much debt do they have? • Are consumers choosing to use the Payday Plus SF program rather than payday loans? • How are the loans used? • How does the loan affect the consumer’s financial position over the short run? • Does the program’s availability change the consumer’s financial practices? • Does it reduce the consumer’s use of predatory financial services? • How is the product performing for the credit union (e.g., writeoff rates, cross-sell opportunities)?

We will address these questions by collecting and analyzing three types of data: (1) administrative data from the participating credit unions, (2) consumer surveys administered both at the time of application and at payoff, and (3) in-depth interviews with the loan consumers and with key players in the participating financial institutions.

Research assistants involved in this project will help design our survey, carry out interviews with users of Payday Plus, learn (the statistical package) STATA, and carry out multivariate analyses.

PROPOSED BUDGET

We are asking VPUE for a total of $36,200 to cover research assistance and some minimal research-related costs. The breakdown is as follows:

Academic Year Student Assistance $16,800 Winter: 6 students @$14/hour, 10 hours/week, 10 weeks ($1400 each)

Spring: 6 students @$14/hour, 10 hours/week, 10 weeks ($1400each)

Summer Student Assistance $16,800 3 students @14/hour, 40 hours/week, 10 weeks ($5,600 each)

Student Research Supplies $ 2,600 4 copies of STATA/SE* for undergraduate use on Center computers (@$425 each)

2 copies of STATA/IC* for undergraduate use on Center computers (@200 each)

Xeroxing interview schedules, transcribed interviews – total: $500

*Note: STATA/SE and STATA/IC are statistical packages that we use in our research. STATA/IC is sufficient for some of our smaller projects as it can handle up to a maximum of 2,047 variables; but we need for the larger analyses because it handle up to 32,767 variables.

SzSz: 10/13/2010

2010-2011 Request for Proposals VPUE Departmental Grants for Undergraduate Research

Community Research Summer Internship Program Interdepartmental Program in Comparative Studies in Race and Ethnicity (CSRE-IDP)

Program Goals

The Community Research Summer Internship (CRSI) is designed to provide CSRE-IDP majors or minors the opportunity to develop a structured research internship in collaboration with an organization committed to public service and/or community development. This internship program aims to facilitate the integration of undergraduate students into original and innovative research experiences that delve expressly into community issues. Enhancing this experience through faculty mentorship, students will be supported to develop and implement research experiences that are community-based, community supported, and that include an analysis that engages issues of race, ethnicity, and difference.

Organizational Structure

The CRSI is directed by the Associate Director of the CSRE-IDP who manages the recruitment and selection process in concert with a faculty committee. The financial manager for the Center for Comparative Studies in Race and Ethnicity works with the Administrator to process stipends and manage the financial transactions with the appropriate VPUE staff. A graduate student works with the Associate Director in the summer months of the program to moderate a community blog that allows students to report on their experiences and provide feedback to others in the course of their work. The graduate student also handles logistics for the internship forum that happens in the autumn quarter following the internship.

Students participating in the Community Research Summer Internship (CRSI) will be supported by a faculty mentor and a community supervisor in the development and implementation of a research project that seeks to benefit a community organization while enhancing the students’ academic experiences. We propose a program of 10 students engaged in separate and distinct research projects. Students will participate in an 8-10 week community-based internship during the summer months (late June-August). The students will utilize the Spring quarter to develop their research proposals and develop their relationships with faculty mentors and community supervisors. The students participate in a preparation course during spring quarter to prepare for the community research experience. The concluding product of the course is a memorandum of understanding developed in collaboration with the faculty mentor and community partner that outlines the research experience and the responsibilities of all stakeholders. The course covers the basics of community research and discusses ethical research and service, community collaboration, mentorship and supervision (helping students to seek the appropriate levels of support and supervision from faculty and community), and creating a meaningful research product for the community served.

The preparation course in Spring will serve as an orientation for students, allowing for formal training and for students to understand their obligations to the internship experience. An orientation meeting for community supervisors as well as regular “check-ins” will ensure appropriate support for the students in their off- campus research sites. At the conclusion of the research experience, the interns will share the findings of their research in a forum that includes their faculty mentors and community supervisors (when local). In particular this forum will encourage students to share lessons from their internship experience and ways their research benefited the host organization.

Faculty Recruitment

To recruit faculty mentors we will largely rely on the students accepted into the program. The application process we use asks students to find a faculty mentor for their project and requires the faculty mentor to sign a “commitment to mentorship”. We will also specify that faculty need to be willing to sponsor research; specifically students applications for IRB approval (which may require their participation in the CITI Training if they haven’t completed in previously for their own research. Our hope is that articulating that need will help students and faculty better evaluate their ability to successfully enter the mentor relationship. In the interview process, we ask students to identify their faculty mentor and share their reasons for wanting to work with the faculty member(s). To improve faculty-student matches this year, we will host an orientation meeting with students and their faculty mentors to discuss mentorship and the expectations for the internship experience. This, we hope, will allow faculty and students to determine if the match is appropriate and if both parties can commit to the requirements of the relationship.

Project Objectives

The CRSI program has five primary objectives for its participants: • the proposed research project will provide the student with experience employing specific methodologies beneficial to the study of race and/or ethnicity and research with community organizations. • the proposed research project will expand and augment the student’s major course of study. • the proposed research project will integrate the student in a substantive and meaningful way into the work of a community organization committed to public service, public policy, and/or community development. • the proposed research project will provide valuable experience for future career considerations and/or advanced study or projects such as an honors thesis. • the proposed research will benefit the community served.

Examples of Past CRSI Projects

• A student conducts interviews with displaced Vietnamese youth following Hurricane Katrina. The transcripts from these interviews are used by Surviving Katrina and Rita in Houston as part of a submission to the Library of Congress. • A students works with Waikato Raupatu Trust Company Ltd. in New Zealand developing, distributing and analyzing a survey exploring Maori identity and they ways they indicate tribal membership. • A student works with Facing History and Ourselves to research the accuracy and representation of different racial and ethnic groups in the most common history textbooks used in public schools.

Student Recruitment

To recruit students we will advertise broadly prioritizing CSRE-IDP majors and minors, but accepting applications from students in any discipline interested in community research that explicitly engages issues of race and ethnicity. We will design a flyer that will be distributed physically and electronically to students. We will host an information session that will explain the program and its requirements to students as well as distribute applications. Based on recommendations from faculty, we will invite particular students to apply to the program.

Student Assignments

Interns will identify agencies or nonprofits where they are able to conduct student-initiated research or participate in research identified by the organization. Students would develop proposals in consultation with a faculty mentor and/or community partner and solicit support (in writing) of their research from the internship agency. At the end of spring quarter (as the final assignment for CSRE 146), students will complete a memorandum of understanding that outlines the expectations and responsibilities for all stakeholders in the research relationship.

As part of their participation in a preparation course for CRSI, an orientation meeting will acquaint students with the graduate student internship coordinator and program administrator, to help students understand their duties and obligations as summer interns, and to be mindful of the resources available to them through their internship experience. At this meeting, students will be informed that they will be expected to complete five assignments.

The first assignment will be a weekly progress report completed at the end of each week. The content of this short paper should review the activities engaged in during the preceding week. In particular, this assignment serves to detail the students’ challenges and accomplishments as they work to satisfactorily complete the summer research project. This assignment will be submitted weekly and then students will meet regularly with the internship coordinator to review their progress. The coordinator also will be responsible for summarizing and verbally reporting their contents to the program administrator and for flagging potential problems as they may arise over the course of the summer.

The second assignment students will complete is regular and engaged contribution to the community blog. This will serve as a forum for the interns to dialogue about the process of the research experience and to explore the various issues that emerge. The blog will be monitored by the internship coordinator who will present prompts (guided by meetings with students and/or the progress reports) to encourage posts and discussion amongst the interns. The blog will serve to build and sustain community, providing a structured but casual space for the students to make connections about their research and their experiences.

The third assignment students must complete is an end-of-internship report about their internship activities and experiences, including a write-up of their research and whatever findings and conclusions this work produces. This paper may be based in-part on the aforementioned weekly progress reports and it should focus primarily on the results of the students’ research. It is expected that this final paper will be approximately 10-15 pages in length. This paper must be completed and submitted to the program administrator by the second week of Fall quarter. Further, copies of the paper will be shared with the intern’s faculty mentor and community supervisor in order to provide the student constructive feedback on the research and to consider ways to build on this experience for the student’s future studies.

The fourth assignment that students will participate in is the CCSRE Community Research Summer Internship Forum. This experience will be organized and facilitated by the internship coordinator and the program administrator. The purpose of this forum is to give students an opportunity to present and discuss their summer research work with other students, faculty mentors, community supervisors, and other supportive and interested parties. This will provide them with a valuable opportunity to obtain feedback about their research as well as to reflect on how they might have improved their efforts.

Finally, we will ask all Community Research Summer Interns to apply to present at SURPS.

Mentoring Strategies

Interns will have the support of a faculty mentor and community partner guiding the development and implementation of the research experience. Mentors will be carefully recruited to ensure relationships that will enrich the experience for both the student and faculty member. We will encourage dialogue and provide structured opportunities for the mentor relationship. Ideally, faculty will be as interested in the research (topic or methodology) as the student to create a mutually beneficial experience. Community partners will guide students in their research experiences, providing access to the community, insight into community concerns, and best practices for working in the community.

In the spring quarter before the internship begins, students will participate in the course “Community Matters: Research and Service with Community Organizations” (CSRE 146). This course, taught by the Associate Director of the CSRE-IDP, introduces students to ethical and effective methods for conducting research with community. Students work to create a memorandum of understanding with the community supervisor and their faculty mentor that ensures an active (and hopefully consistent) dialogue that prepares the student for the research internship. Further, in working so closely with the Associate Director, the course provides another mentor who is familiar with the students’ work and can provide an additional perspective on the project.

Improving Student Experiences

While the blog and the weekly progress reports have provided useful information on the experiences of the CRSI participants, it would be helpful to create an opportunity for regular dialogue during the summer research experience. We hope to utilize Skype or a similar mechanism to talk with students during their research experiences. For students who are locally placed, we may institute site visits rather than using Skype.

We need to improve the relationships and interactions between CRSI participants and faculty mentors throughout the summer. We would like to build accountability into the mentor relationship between students and faculty. We’ve found that a midsummer check in with community supervisors as well as an end of internship conversation has helped community supervisors better understand their role in the students’ research and has given our program important insight into the on-site experiences of our students. We need to implement a similar process with faculty members to understand the mentor relationship and the tasks faculty associate with this relationship, to encourage consistent interaction, and to get feedback from faculty about the students’ preparation and the quality of the research being conducted.

These changes, we hope, will improve the students’ experiences by better attending to their motivations for applying to the CRSI and building more accountability into the mentor relationships important to the program.

Program Budget

Student Stipends $56,000 $14/hour for 40 hours/week for 10 weeks = $5600 (x 10 students)

We might also consider funding students for 40 hours/week for 8 weeks ($4480). The CSRE-IDP has funds to support 2 students at this level for the summer of 2011. We are requesting support for 10 students which would expand the Community Research Summer Internship by 2 students.

Developmental Biology Undergraduate Research Program

Research Program Goals Our goal is to support 12 undergraduate students to conduct cell and developmental biology research in our Developmental Biology Department laboratories. Eight department faculty members are committed to participate, and other faculty members may join them during this academic year. Our goals include the continuation of the success of previous VPUE research students in the Developmental Biology Department.

The Department of Developmental Biology is applying for the eighth consecutive year for a departmental VPUE grant. Developmental Biology has established an exceptional record in mentoring undergraduates in research. In the previous 13 years, more than 60 Biology and Human Biology undergraduates have been awarded Firestone Medals for excellence in undergraduate research in biomedical sciences. Of this total number of undergraduate medalists, Developmental Biology faculty served as primary research advisors to more than 15 Firestone Medal winners. To be more specific, of the faculty participating in this VPUE proposal at least six have mentored Firestone Medal winners, including several by Professors Barres (4 students), Fuller (4 students), Scott (5 students) and Porzig (2 students). Overall, we believe that the Developmental Biology department has mentored more Firestone Medal winners than all of the other basic science departments in the School of Medicine combined.

The VPUE grant allows talented undergraduates to begin their research earlier than they otherwise would, and to initiate highly successful research projects. Based on the past eight years, the VPUE students in Developmental Biology typically continue with undergraduate research and complete honors programs in Human Biology, Biological Sciences, and other undergraduate science majors.

Program Structure The department grant will support students under the guidance of Professors Ben Barres, Gill Bejerano, Margaret Fuller, Seung Kim, Stuart Kim, Harley McAdams, Will Talbot and Matthew Scott. The designated faculty members who will oversee the Program are Professors Ellen Porzig and Minx Fuller.

Each student will conduct laboratory research on a topic of importance to the host lab, and will be closely associated with a graduate student or postdoctoral fellow in addition to the faculty mentor. Each of the participating labs would like to host and mentor one student for ten weeks during the summer preceding their Junior year. Professor Fuller, and several other faculty are requesting support for two summer students. In addition Professor Bejerano is requesting VPUE funding in his laboratory during the academic year.

Each student will learn to critically review the scientific literature and will present a review of several current papers to a graduate student/post-doc in their lab group during the summer.

In addition to the group activities in the individual Developmental Biology laboratories, VPUE students are welcome to join in several of the faculty seminars and workshops offered by the Office of Graduate Education for the 2011 Stanford Summer Research Program students, including sessions on planning careers in biomedical research. Departmental VPUE students will be encouraged to initiate an honors project and to subsequently apply for URO grants, and there are many such examples of our students who have done so.

Oversight and Mentorship Each of the eight participating faculty in the Department of Developmental Biology will provide specific oversight of the research projects in cell and developmental biology research in his/her laboratories. Each student will be paired with a graduate student who is selected for their mentorship.

In comparison to other medical school departments, Developmental Biology has a noteworthy commitment to undergraduate education and to teaching. The department of Developmental Biology has responsibility for teaching the Human Biology 3A core course, Cell and Developmental Biology, including lectures by Fuller, Scott and Talbot. In addition, this year Ellen Porzig will offer a Freshman seminar and two upper division undergraduate courses, Human Developmental Biology and Medicine (Spring) and Vertebrate Biology (Winter). Minx Fuller plans to teach The Stem Cell (HB 157). In addition to these five undergraduate courses mentioned above, the Department of Developmental Biology accepts select undergraduate students into our graduate and medical courses including DB 201, Development and Disease Mechanisms, (Porzig, Scott, Kingsley, Kim), DB 202 (Porzig and Behr) and Developmental Biology 210 ( Beachy) .

The department has a high proportion of faculty who have won teaching awards (e. g. Walter Gores Award for Excellence in Teaching – Ellen Porzig, and the Henry Kaiser Award for Excellence in Pre-clinical Teaching -Ben Barres, Dale Kaiser, Seung Kim, Ellen Porzig (twice) and Irv Weissman). In addition, Drs Barres, Scott and Porzig have been consistently cited for excellence in teaching medical students.

Student Research Activities In addition to laboratory based research projects described below, each student will learn to critically review the scientific literature and will present a review of several current papers to a graduate student/post-doc in their lab group during the summer.

A description of the specific projects available for VPUE undergraduates is provided below by Professors Ben Barres, Gill Bejerano, Margaret Fuller, Seung Kim, Stuart Kim, Harley McAdams, Matthew Scott and Will Talbot respectively:

Ben Barres We are interested in the development and function of glial cells in the mammalian central nervous system. To understand the interactions between neurons and glial cells we have developed methods to highly purify and culture retinal ganglion cells (neurons) as well as the glial cell types they interact with, oligodendrocytes and astrocytes, from the rodent optic nerve. We are using a large variety of methods to address these issues including cell purification by immunopanning, tissue culture, patch clamping, immunohistochemistry and molecular biology. Currently, we are focusing on several questions:

(1) What are the cell-cell interactions that control myelination and node of Ranvier formation?

(2) Do glial cells play a role in synapse formation and function?

(3) What are the signals that promote the survival and growth of retinal ganglion cells and can we use this knowledge to promote their survival and regeneration after injury?

(4) How do protoplasmic astrocytes, the main glial cell type in gray matter, develop and what is their function?

We have found evidence of several novel glial signals that induce the onset of myelination, the clustering of axonal sodium channels, the survival and growth of retinal ganglion cells, and the formation of synapses. We are characterizing these processes and are attempting to identify these glial-derived molecules.

Gill Bejerano It is only very recently that we have come to appreciate that the 20-25,000 protein coding genes in our genome may be regulated by a staggering 1,000,000 promoter, enhancer, silencer and insulator regulatory elements, allowing different cells to express very different protein repertoires. We study this fascinating "control layer" of the human genome, with an aim to:

1. Identify cis-regulatory elements in the human genome and annotate them for function. 2. Map the cis-regulatory architecture controlling early limb, forebrain and placenta development, and understand its contribution to human disease. 3. Study the origins and evolution of regulatory genomic regions and reveal their contribution to vertebrate, mammalian and human specific evolution.

To address these challenges we use a potent combination of computational and experimental approaches. We write computational tools to discover cis-regulatory codes and trace their evolution; we run our tools on massive genomic datasets to generate testable hypotheses; and we perform molecular biology experiments to validate our hypotheses and generate novel ones. We work in small teams of experimentalists and computational tool users, who interact directly with our computational tool builders. Please see http://bejerano.stanford.edu/ for more.

Margaret Fuller Stem cells, regeneration, spermatogenesis, transcriptional control, meiotic cell cycle, cell division, infertility. We investigate the mechanisms that regulate proliferation, differentiation and self-renewal of adult stem cells in vivo, using the laboratory fruitfly Drosophila as a model system. Understanding the fundamental mechanisms that regulate normal adult stem cell behavior in the body may provide key strategies for growth, amplification and manipulation of adult stem cells for cell therapy and tissue regeneration. We have recently demonstrated that the microenvironment provided by support cells plays a critical role in regulation of stem self-renewal and maintenance in vivo and identified signaling molecules that specify stem cell self-renewal.

A second focus of research in our laboratory explores how the developmental program regulates the cell cycle. During development of an embryo, tissue or organ, it is critical that cells divide on schedule and stop dividing when they are supposed to. Failure of precursor cells to stop dividing and initiate differentiation is an early step on the road to cancer. We study the molecular mechanisms that regulate cell cycle progression and the defects that lead to cell cycle arrest or precursor cell proliferation during the developmentally programmed cell cycle of male meiosis. We have identified important checkpoint pathways that coordinate cell cycle progression with the expression of terminal differentiation genes. In addition, we use genetic approaches in Drosophila to identify key mechanisms that mediate and regulate cell division and polarized cell growth.

Our laboratory also studies the molecular and genetic causes underlying meiosis I arrest male infertility. We discovered that spermatogenesis requires the action of specialized forms of the basic transcription machinery. Testis-specific components of the general transcription machinery may also be utilized for normal male fertility in mouse and man. We are now using both biochemical and molecular genetic approaches to discover how this testis-specific transcription machinery turns on transcription of terminal differentiation genes required for sperm formation.

Seung Kim Vertebrate organ development requires mechanisms to establish an integrated, stereotyped tissue pattern from multiple distinct cellular components. Many vital organs derive from the endodermal and mesodermal germ layers to form the gastrointestinal and respiratory tracts, yet little is known about the genetic programs that coordinate steps culminating in proper organ morphogenesis and axial position, cell differentiation and physiologic function.

We are using a variety of organisms accessible to embryological, genetic, and molecular methods, to identify cell interactions and signaling pathways that regulate early steps in pancreas development. Studies from our laboratory and others demonstrate that Hedgehog, TGF-ß and Wnt signals, as well as functions of tumor suppressor proteins like menin and their transcriptional partners, are essential for formation growth and/or function of the pancreas. Some of the pathways active during ontogeny also regulate pancreatic growth during adulthood, and we are studying the role of these genetic pathways in growth control and physiologic function of the mature pancreas in mice. Signaling errors in these pathways may promote pathogenesis of human pancreatic disease states, including endocrine and exocrine pancreatic cancer. From studies of human tissues, we hope to translate our basic studies into novel diagnostic and therapeutic strategies for these common diseases.

Stuart Kim Functional genomics of C. elegans aging Aging is a complex process driven by diverse molecular pathways and biochemical events. Our goal is to first identify genes that are differentially expressed in old versus young animals, and then to dissect apart how changes in these genes lead to functional decline and senescence in old age. We are using the nematode C. elegans as a model system for aging, because it has a rapid lifespan, a small size, a powerful genetic toolkit and many mutants are already known to lengthen lifespan.

We have used DNA microarrays to perform a genome-wide screen for genes that change expression in old worms, in the dauer state (an alternative stage with an extremely long lifespan), and in four mutants with altered lifespans. We combined the expression results from these DNA microarray experiments and identified a core set of 233 genes that show consistent changes in expression across different aging experiments. Having identified age-regulated genes, we propose to study the function of a large number of these genes in parallel, to reveal underlying mechanisms in the process of aging. We are generating GFP reporters for the age-regulated genes in order to use them as biomarkers for age and to reveal which tissues are most susceptible to age-related decline. We will use loss- and gain-of-function experiments to elucidate the function of these genes on aging. Finally, we will elucidate how a GATA transcriptional circuit controls aging, and perform a genome-wide RNAi screen for new aging mutants.

Harley McAdams Our lab is focused on understanding the nature of bacterial genetic regulation. We use a variety of tools: gene expression microarrays, advanced techniques of fluorescence and electron microscopy, and a broad range of computational tools for bioinformatics and modeling.

Our interests range far beyond "conventional" approaches to genetic regulation to include the effects of dynamic spatial and temporal positioning of regulatory proteins and the regulatory effects working through the dynamic three-dimensional organization of the chromosome in the dividing cell. We are exploring how regulatory molecules are dynamically localized to particular cell positions and how this localization is integrated into the control mechanisms of the cell.

Matthew Scott We are studying how genes control development in order to learn how tissues and organs are formed and organized. To that end we study the development of the classic genetic organism, the fruit fly Drosophila, mammalian embryonic stem cells, and the mammalian cerebellum. With respect to specific types of genes, we study Hedgehog signaling, which is involved in controlling cell types and cell division in many tissues, planar polarity genes, which are involved in polarizing the cytoskeleton in epithelia, Rab proteins and Niemann-Pick C disease genes, which are involved in controlling movement of organelles within cells. Mutations in many developmental genes can lead to disease, which has led us to our current projects in cancer research, birth defects, and neurodegenerative disease. In recent work we have investigated how insulin proteins control growth in Drosophila, and how specific types of neurons regulate the release of insulin to allow proper timing and amount of growth.

Will Talbot Our goal is to define new genes with essential functions in the development of myelinated axons using genetic approaches in zebrafish. The myelin sheath allows for rapid axonal conduction in vertebrates. Disruption of myelin underlies important human diseases, including Multiple Sclerosis and peripheral neuropathies. The formation of myelin, which involves reciprocal signaling between neurons and glial cells, a dramatic morphological transformation of the glial cells, and organization of the axon into different specialized domains, is fascinating but nonetheless poorly understood. _

In genetic screens, we have identified mutations in at least 15 different genes that have specific functions in the development of myelinated axons. By characterizing the mutant phenotypes, we are working to define the functions of these genes at the cellular level. Through genetic mapping and positional cloning, we identify the mutated genes and analyze their functions at the molecular level. This project will discover new genes with essential functions in myelination, define new zebrafish models of important myelin disorders in humans, and provide new avenues toward therapies for myelin repair and prevention of axonal damage after demyelination.

Ongoing projects include the analysis of a receptor that initiates myelin formation in Schwann cells, the analysis of signals that guide Schwann cell migration, screening for small molecules that can rescue myelin in our mutants, and dissection of neuro-immune interactions.

Recruitment Plan Our VPUE student selection process will stem from five or six undergraduate courses offered by the Department faculty. Sophomores, especially those who have successfully completed the Winter quarter undergraduate Human Biology 3 A course, will be interviewed for the 10 research positions. In addition Biology undergraduates will be accepted into Developmental Biolgoy labs. In addition, undergraduates studying physics, engineering or computer sciences are successfully recruited into department labs including those of McAdams, Bejerano and Scott.

Interested Sophomores who will be supported by the Dev Bio department VPUE grant may elect to take an optional, independent 1 unit, pre-research seminar with Ellen Porzig to discuss the specific selection of research projects, to draft a research proposal and to learn how to critically review the primary scientific literature in developmental biology..

We remain especially interested in recruiting some of Stanford under-represented minority undergraduates to participate in our research program.

Student Products and Evaluation Students will regularly participate in individual lab meetings. Students will be invited to present their research in oral and in poster form at the completion of their summer project.

Ellen Porzig offers to meet with VPUE students at the mid-point of the summer and at the point of completion of their research. In addition, former VPUE researches will be tracked through their subsequent Stanford years. The great majority of Developmental Biology department students have continued to successfully conduct undergraduate research following the summers of research support. Many VPUE students in the developmental biology department have subsequently graduated from Stanford with Honors, typically in either Biology of Human Biology. Previous VPUE students in the department of Developmental Biology have been very successful in their undergraduate research endeavors. . As in previous years, we expect that, after graduation from Stanford, most of the VPUE supported students will subsequently enter MD and Ph.D programs in biomedical sciences. Our department has a strong record of mentoring undergraduates in research and we are thankful for the opportunity to request VPUE grant support to continue this excellent program during this academic year. Memory Theater: Stanford Summer Theater 2011

Program Goals

We are applying for 12 full-position and 3 half-position VPUE-supported research grants for undergraduates working in Drama (described in detail below in the Student Activities section). These students will collaborate with Drama Department faculty and theater professionals on Stanford Summer Theater's (SST's) 2011 Festival “Memory Theater,” part of SICA’s year-long exploration of Memory and the Arts. The VPUE-funded undergraduates will play an integral role in the productions of Nobel Laureate Harold Pinter’s Old Times and Seneca’s Oedipus, in the stagings of W.B. Yeats Purgatory, Sam Shepard’s Killer’s Head, and Brian Friel’s Afterplay (part of the CSP all-day symposium “Theatrical Memory”), and will help organize and run SST's thirteenth annual festival, including the free weekly Film Series, Out of the Past. The students also will work with Stanford faculty in other departments, who serve as principal collaborators on the SICA grant, as well as faculty and panelists who will join the students for the CSP symposium.

Our VPUE-supported students work closely with professional artists, combining academic research with production experience to gain new insights into festival management, performance techniques, ensemble work, and the role that recollection plays in theater performance. Drama students also develop research methodologies and practical skills useful for their senior research and/or honors projects, most of which involve performance. Those drawn to professional theater gain experience and skills useful in auditioning for and succeeding in MFA programs following their graduation from Stanford. The list of former Stanford Drama students supported by the VPUE-SST collaboration who have moved from SST to MFA programs or professional work in the theater and dance is impressive and growing (Geoff Sobelle, Ann Larlarb, Annie Abrams, Jordan Kaplan, Amir El-Jamal, Donnel Hill, Roselyn Hallett, Patrick Davis, Luke Taylor, Katharine Hawthorne, among many others). The SST website contains footage of student interviews (conducted last summer by Stanford’s Humanities Outreach Officer Corrie Goldman) that speak to the value of the VPUE-SST program for undergraduate theater artists.

In addition to VPUE, SST’s 2011 Festival, Memory Theater has many campus partners, including the Departments of Drama and Classics, SICA, the Continuing Studies Program, and the School of H&S. Principal faculty collaborators include SST Artistic Director Rush Rehm (Drama and Classics), Charles Junkerman (Associate Provost and Dean of Continuing Studies), and Stanford faculty who have focused on memory and the past: Robert Harrison (French and Italian - Dominion of the Dead, Chicago 2003), Alice Rayner (Drama - Ghosts: Death’s Double and the Phenomena of Theatre, Minnesota 2006), Andrea Nightingale (Classics and Comparative Literature - Once Out of Nature: Augustine on Time and the Body (forthcoming, Chicago 2011), and Charitini Douvaldzi (German and Comparative Literature - book-in-progress on Freud and memory). Memory Theater will bring these faculty members and their work into conversation with SST productions of Dylan Thomas’ Under Milk Wood (April 21-23, 2011), Harold Pinter’s Old Times (July 7-24, 2011), Seneca’s Oedipus (August 4-14, 2011) and shorter works including W.B. Yeats’ Purgatory, Sam Shepard’s Killer’s Head, and Brian Friel’s Afterplay (July30, 2011).

1 Background and Overview

Stanford Summer Theater (SST) has the following goals:

• bring professional theater to the Stanford community in an annual summer festival, presenting challenging plays in a fresh, lively, and informed manner

• address larger intellectual, cultural, and political issues raised by the plays and playwrights through an integrated festival program, including main stage and second season productions, film series, staged readings, community symposia, and a CSP course on the festival (last summer there were 65 enrolled students).

• provide Stanford students with the opportunity to study and work alongside faculty and theater professionals in an intense collaboration that joins research with practice, involving them in all aspects of the festival: performance, design, stage management, technical support, community outreach, administration, publicity, symposium planning, film series organization, etc.

• encourage audiences to come to live theater at Stanford, celebrating what the theater and the university can bring to the cultural life of the community.

Stanford Summer Theater’ annual Festival is listed in the summer festival section of the NY Times and reviewed in the local press, including San Francisco Chronicle, San Jose Mercury- News, Palo Alto Weekly, Palo Alto Daily, Metro, San Francisco Examiner. Its main-stage and second-stage productions, staged readings, film series, public lectures, community symposium, and affiliated CSP courses are attended by roughly 4, 000 patrons each summer.

In 2002, SST and the Drama Department inaugurated an innovative program involving two undergraduates supported by VPUE, who worked closely with Stanford faculty and theater professionals as members of the SST Company. As the SST program has grown--along with VPUE support--so have the opportunities for student involvement and research, allowing our VPUE students to demonstrate their excellence in a public forum that can mean an enormous amount to young student-artists. Last summer (2010), VPUE supported 10 full-time and 2 part- time research positions for students working with SST. We are applying for 12-full-time and 3 part-time positions for 2011.

Each student funded by a VPUE stipend will conduct research related to SST's 13th festival, Memory Theater. This research involves preparing the theatrical productions of Old Times and Oedipus, the CSP Symposium (including the stagings of the Yeats, Shepard, and Friel pieces), and the Film Series Out of the Past. In addition, all VPUE students attend a weekly “Seminar with the Artists,” which we instituted last year. The weekly seminar provides an informal opportunity to talk with theater professionals working with SST about their experience, training, advice, and insights.

2 Program Structure

As in past summers, the research program will begin after graduation and run for nine weeks, Monday June 13 through Sunday August 14, 2011. We propose to involve 12 undergraduates in full-time research (40 hours/week), and 3 undergraduates in half-time research (20 hours/week), working closely with Drama faculty, guest artists, Drama staff, the Continuing Studies Program, our principal faculty collaborators, and an appreciative public.

Timetable

Students will work on, rehearse, and /or perform Old Times and/or Oedipus, from June 13 until August 14, 2011, the last day of the Festival. Old Times will play for 12 performances, July 7 – July 24, 2011; Oedipus will play for 10 performances, August 4 – August 14, 2011. Students also will prepare and perform the Shepard, Yeats, and Friel scenes for the all-day CSP symposium on July 30, and help organize the Film Festival, which runs every Monday night from July 11 - August 8 (5 screenings).

Faculty and Administrative Oversight

Professors Rush Rehm (Directing/Festival Management and Producing) and Michael Ramsaur (Lighting); Drama Lecturers Kay Kostopoulos (Acting), Jeffrey Bihr (Directing), Connie Strayer (Costume Design), Eric Flatmo (Set Design); Drama Staff members Stefanie Okuda (Publicist/Graphic Artist) and Patrice O’Dwyer (Departmental Administrator); Drama Production Staff, including Ross Williams (Technical Director) and Paul Strayer (Shop Foreman); Associate Provost and Dean of Continuing Studies Charlie Junkerman (who helps plan the symposium); and SST guest artists and symposium lecturers (Professors Alice Rayner, Andrea Nightingale, Charitini Douvaldzi, and Robert Harrison). All the above will provide educational guidance for the program.

Student Activities

All students research and work on the various productions of Memory Theater described above, participate in post-show discussions of the performance; plan, perform, or work on the CSP Symposium; help plan and/or attend the Out of the Past Film Festival and join in the faculty-led post-screening discussions.

Student research positions for 2011 will include the following:

1) Festival Producer/Company Manager: works closely with the Artistic Director; in charge of coordinating all aspects of the festival (productions, film series, symposium); “point person” for housing issues and Company matters; organizer of the VPUE Seminar with the Artists,

2) Associate Festival Producer/Publicist: works closely with the Artistic Director and Festival Producer, and with Drama Department Publicist and Graphic Artist Stefanie Okuda; “point person” for contact with press, community groups, outside educational institutions, Stanford Conference Center, Stanford Alumni Center, etc.

3

3). Associate Festival Producer/Front of House/ Film Series Coordinator: works closely with the Artistic Director, Festival Producer, and Drama Department Publicist Stefanie Okuda; handles all box office and ticketing; helps in promotion and advertising; “point person” for the Film Series (oversees filmographies and programs for each screening, handles guest speakers and post-screening discussions, etc.).

4) Stage Manager, Old Times: attends all rehearsals, working closely with the director and the actors; documents show for performance; calls all performances, provides artistic oversight over all aspects of the run of the show.

5) Stage Manager, Oedipus: attends all rehearsals, working closely with the director and the actors; documents show for performance; calls all performances, provides artistic oversight over all aspects of the run of the show.

6. Assistant Stage Manager Old Times and Assistant Stage Manager Oedipus: attends all rehearsals of both shows, when possible; helps document show for performances; works in booth with Stage Manager on all performances.

7) Actor: rehearses and performs Oedipus and Symposium scenes; understudies role in Old Times

8) Actor: rehearses and performs Oedipus and Symposium scenes; understudies role in Old Times

9) Actor: rehearses and performs Oedipus and Symposium scenes; understudies role in Old Times

10) Actor: rehearses and performs Oedipus and Symposium scenes.

11) Actor: rehearses and performs Oedipus and Symposium scenes.

12) Actor: rehearses and performs Oedipus and Symposium scenes.

Half – time research positions:

1) Wardrobe Mistress/Dresser/Costume Run: works closely with Costume Designer Connie Strayer, serves as Dresser and Costume Run for all performances of Old Times; assists in costuming needs for Symposium (20 hours/week).

2) Wardrobe Mistress/Dresser/Costume Run: works closely with Costume Designer Connie Strayer, serves as Dresser and Costume Run for all performances of Oedipus; assists in costuming needs for Symposium (20 hours/week).

3) Lighting Design Assistant: works closely with Lighting Designer Michael Ramsaur on Old Times and Oedipus (20 hours/week).

4 Student Recruitment

Students will be interviewed and (when appropriate) auditioned early in the Winter Quarter 2011. We also will attend non-Drama productions, as we've found that sometimes quite talented student actors do not audition or appear in Drama Department productions. We will continue to recruit students through the African Student Association, the Caribbean Students Association, the Committee on Black Performing Arts, the dance division, and the Sophomore College program at Ashland. Faculty interest each summer remains high, and we augment faculty involvement with guest artists and designers.

Student Evaluation

Because of the nature of theatrical work, the faculty, guest artists, and Drama staff are in contact with the VPUE students on almost a daily basis during the summer research/production period. As noted above, to enhance student feedback in a timely fashion we have introduced the position of company manager, who oversees housing, scheduling, and time management issues, and holds weekly company meetings to address problems as they come up. For the past five summers we have required our students to fill out the VPUE evaluation form. We incorporate their suggestions and make changes that improve the program, and we will continue to do so.

Budget

12 full-time summer stipends, 3 half-time summer stipends, June 13-August 14, 2011. 12 @ 40 hrs/week x 9 weeks @ $14/hour (12 x $ 5,040) = $60, 480 3 @ 20 hrs/week x 9 weeks @ $14/hour (3 x $2,520) = $7,560

Total requested from VPUE = $68,040

Budget Notes

In addition to VPUE support, SST requires an annual budget (production, outreach, Actors Equity Guest Artist contracts, royalties, publicity, sets and costumes, photography, tech support, interns program, etc.) of roughly $135,000 for the 2011 season. We procure this sum via contributions from Drama, Continuing Studies, SICA, H&S, VPGE, other departments, and box- office income. For 2011, we have secured contributions from CSP ($40,000), Classics ($15,000), and SICA ($15,000), and Drama ($12,000 carried over from 2010). We project our box-office income of $31,000 for 2011 (12 performances, Old Times, Pigott Theater, 10 performances, Oedipus, Nitery Theater). We also are seeking a subvention from H&S of $11,000, and VPGE of $12,000 (last summer, H&S gave us $12,000 and VPGE $10,000). We have met budgetary goals every year, and we manage our expenses responsibly, administered by Drama Administrator Patrice O’Dwyer.

Rush Rehm Artistic Director, Stanford Summer Theater Professor, Drama and Classics

5 Department of Drama

Undergraduate Research Departmental Grant

This Undergraduate Research Departmental Grant will be used to support Drama majors and minors and other dedicated Drama students in their research and performance activities.

This year, we plan to use Undergraduate Research Departmental Grant for four distinct purposes.

a. The grant funds will be used to provide financial support for specific and ongoing

student research projects and Senior Project performance productions. In their

Senior Projects, our students work closely with faculty members in preparation,

developing and execution of a stage performance. Typically, Senior Projects

range from full production at the Prosser Theater to a class project that students

decide to develop and transform into a more developed theatrical production.

Often, our students use their senior projects as a practical segment of their Honors

Thesis. In general, Senior Project is a capstone experience to Drama Students, and

the department always puts much effort into logistic, academic, and financial

support of these projects. For the financial support of the senior projects, the

department vitally depends on the support from VPUE office. This is the itemized

list of senior projects:

1) Logan Hehn plans to work on equestrian performance. Being a member of

the Stanford Equestrian Team and a Drama Major, he has a unique set of skills to explore this rare form of performance. He will stage Peter

Shaffer’s play Equus in a site specific setting.

2) Dylan Rush will, similarly to Logan Hehn, combine his drama training

and his non-academic interests to stage Tracy Lettis’s play Killer Joe,

which explore physicality of human interaction. Ins tagging of this play,

Dylan Rush plans to explore both sports and theater as distinct forms of

performance.

3) Ariel Mazel-Gee will use the Department of drama new offering of

courses and productions that deal with musical theater in order to explore

the role of ethnicity in contemporary musicals.

4) Brandon Jackson will explore the plays and other performance forms that

deal with the representation of ethnicity in late 18th and early 19th century

drama. This project on antebellum theater in America is an excellent

example of performance as research methodology.

5) Paul Brownlee is still at the exploratory stage for a couple of ideas that he

has for his Senior Project. b. Support for the supervised research projects of Drama Minors. In some areas,

such as lighting or dance, students are not required to produce a Senior Project.

However, they work with faculty on developing practical projects that serve as

their gateway to the profession.

Michael Rooney and Jacob Boem, along with 4 or 5 other students will be

involved with the "Light up the Campus" project (still in the pre-proposal state).

They would be working with lighting equipment and projection equipment to use on campus building and spaces to significantly alter the appearance and aesthetic

response to university buildings. Needed would be rental of projection

equipment, and LED (low power consumption) equipment as well as power

distribution panels and cables. This work will begin toward the end of Fall

Quarter and continue through winter quarter, preparing for a weekend of

presentation early Spring Quarter. There would be a separate proposal for the

"performance" aspect of the project.

c. Summer research, which is typically used by our majors in their junior year, in

preparation for their work on the Senior Project. At this point, the following

students expressed interest in working on their summer research: Patrick Kelly

will work on the exploratory stage of his senior project, for which he will write a

play based on the film Casablanca and Alexandra Clark, who plans to do the

research on the use drama in special education, especially in juvenile facilities.

d. Support for specialists in our acting classes. In areas such as stage combat, voice

training, or stage fencing, we invite master teachers and specialists to work with

our students.

5 Senior projects at $2,000 per project $10,000

Minor Lighting (“Light Up the Campus”) $4,000

Summer Research Projects $1,500

Guest Master Classes $4,000

Total $19,500

School of Earth Sciences Undergraduate Research Program 2010-11 VPUE Departmental Grant Proposal Administrative Contact: Anne Egger ([email protected]) Faculty Contact: Simon Klemperer ([email protected])

Program Summary

The principal aim of the proposed School of Earth Sciences (SES) research program is to provide 25 or more undergraduate students the opportunity to work on a strongly mentored yet individualized research project during the summer of 2011 in order to build and strengthen our community of undergraduate researchers within the school. In particular, we seek to engage students at the early stages in their academic careers in order to allow them to explore one aspect of the Earth sciences in depth while learning about the diversity of ideas available for study within the school.

Our long-running program provides students with an authentic research experience from proposal writing to presentation of results. Students are responsible for contacting a potential advisor and working with them to develop a feasible research project, refining the project once funded, conducting the research, and presenting their results. To facilitate the development of a community despite their individualized projects, students participate in a research preparation seminar during spring quarter and a summer lunchtime seminar.

This proposal represents a request for renewal of funding for a program that has grown and evolved significantly over the past eight years. We plan to make a few minor changes to our program this year, resulting from both student and faculty feedback and evaluation, including adding field safety training for some students, increasing training in mentoring for graduate students and faculty, and including a 1-day group field trip for students on campus during the summer. Overall, however, the strength of our “authentic research” program has been reinforced by positive feedback from students and faculty alike.

2010-11 SES Undergraduate Research Program Proposal 2

School of Earth Sciences Undergraduate Research Program 2010-11 VPUE Departmental Grant Proposal

The School of Earth Sciences seeks funding for 25 student researchers during the summer of 2011. We anticipate the involvement of 20 or more faculty advisors within all departments and programs in the school. This proposal represents a renewal of funding for our highly successful program, which has been in place since 2002 (see Appendices I, II). We are requesting funding at the same level as the reduced amount we received for the 2009 summer program.

We have four goals for our Summer Undergraduate Research Program: • to provide a challenging and rewarding research experience for undergraduates at all levels who wish to explore the Earth sciences, not limited by departmental boundaries • to foster interdisciplinary study in the Earth sciences among the undergraduate population • to attract students to major or minor in the Earth sciences and/or complete advanced research in one of the departments or programs within the school • to build a sense of community among students who share a common interest in developing a deeper understanding of Earth

Oversight team The SES Summer Undergraduate Research Program is headed by Anne Egger, the Undergraduate Program Coordinator for the School of Earth Sciences, who will serve as the primary contact for the program. Dr. Egger is supported by the Undergraduate Program Directors in the departments and programs in the school: Dennis Bird (GES), Julie Kennedy (Earth Systems/EESS), Simon Klemperer (Geophysics), and Tony Kovscek (Energy Resources Engineering).

Program details The proposed program will fund approximately 25 student research fellows to work on a strongly mentored but individualized research project during the summer of 2011 with a faculty member and/or graduate student in the School of Earth Sciences. The timeline of the program is as follows:

Winter quarter: Once we have received notification of funding, we will solicit project proposals from students and faculty (see Procedures for recruitment). Students will define their research projects during Winter Quarter in conjunction with a faculty advisor and will submit a short research proposal and application via a web- based form. The number of faculty involved in the program over the past several years has grown in concert with the number of students with a slight decrease in the past year due to budget cuts (see Appendix I); we have seen particular interest from some of our newest faculty across all departments. We expect that the variety of research projects will be similar to the variety of projects in past years (see Appendix III). Proposals will be read by the oversight team and students will be notified of their funding status prior to Spring Break.

Spring Quarter: Funded students will enroll in EarthSci 100 Research Preparation in the spring, in which they will engage in activities to prepare them for their summer research and build their identity as a cohort (see Appendix IV for a syllabus). If necessary, we will divide students into two groups based on their prior research experience. Students with no research experience will engage in activities like scheduling meetings with their research advisor, selecting appropriate background reading, and writing a literature review. Students who have prior research experience will engage in more advanced topics, such as research design and preparing work for publication. During the second half of the course, the two groups 2010-11 SES Undergraduate Research Program Proposal 3 will come together to give presentations about their proposed research to one another. Students may also enroll in directed reading units with their advisor if they choose to do so.

Several of our fellows every year have been either at Hopkins or Stanford@SEA during the spring quarter. Though they are able to enroll and participate in EarthSci 100 via CourseWork, we hope to develop additional online content, perhaps even streaming video, to engage these students more fully.

Also during spring quarter, we will offer additional formal training opportunities for graduate students and faculty who will be mentoring undergraduates. In spring 2010, Egger co-led a workshop with Helen Doyle, Academic Director of the E-IPER program, entitled “Mentoring in Research”. We plan to offer this again, specifically targeting graduate students who will be mentoring undergraduates over the summer. We will hold a similar, shorter workshop for faculty who will be mentoring undergraduates for the first time.

Summer Quarter: Students will conduct the bulk of their research during the summer. Those who are on campus will attend a weekly seminar and lunch, organized by the oversight team and a graduate student teaching assistant, that will feature faculty mentors talking about their research. We will continue our collaboration with the Woods Institute for the Environment over the summer quarter, which has allowed us to bring together a larger group of students with overlapping interests. At this seminar, faculty mentors from SES and Woods present their research; the talk is followed by a lunch where students can continue conversing with the speaker (and the program directors can check on student progress in a casual, informal setting). Faculty will be selected from a broad range of topical areas and academic disciplines, with an emphasis on interdisciplinary environmental research. Near the end of the summer, the seminar will include workshops on poster making and giving effective oral presentations.

In addition, we plan to offer a 1-day field trip to a local site that offers the opportunity to see how all of the disciplines that students are involved in interact. We offered this option for the first time last summer and went to MBARI and Elkhorn Slough, where students could both interact with researchers who were working in the local environment and see where their interests in energy, geology, ecology, and people intersect.

Autumn Quarter: Students will participate in SURPS and/or in a national meeting such as the Global Climate and Energy Project Symposium (held on campus) or the Fall Meeting of the American Geophysical Union (AGU) held in San Francisco. Students will also present their research orally at the School of Earth Sciences Undergraduate Research Symposium, held the Friday of homecoming week to encourage alumni attendance. The oversight team will judge presentations and give awards at this event.

Because many of our students continue their research into the academic year beyond the summer, we will also offer the option of presenting their work in the spring at A-SURPS and at the spring School of Earth Sciences Research Review. As in the past, we anticipate that many students will use their summer research as a springboard to seek opportunities to continue research through the academic year.

Procedures for recruitment We plan to follow a similar procedure as we have used in the past to recruit students into the research program. Upon notification of funding for the research program in early Winter Quarter, we will circulate a call for research proposals to all faculty, graduate students, and undergraduate majors within the School of Earth Sciences, as well as to students in related departments such as Chemistry, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Physics, and Biology. 2010-11 SES Undergraduate Research Program Proposal 4

We hope to continue to expand our recruitment efforts to reach audiences that may not have thought about doing research in the Earth sciences before in an effort to increase the diversity of our student cohort. We will be aided in our efforts by Jerry Harris, a professor in Geophysics, who has developed a program called STREAM (Stanford Teaching and Research Exchange for the Advancement of Geoscience Majors) with the goal of opening a new channel of access for under-represented students into the Earth sciences. We plan to provide information about research opportunities directly to the cultural communities on campus and to seek additional avenues for dissemination about our program. In addition, we will work with Julie Lythcott-Haims and the freshman advising team to reach out to freshmen.

After exploring their options with potential advisors, students will submit a brief, faculty-endorsed proposal for a research project by early March. Student-faculty proposals will be competitively selected for funding by the oversight team based on the quality of the proposal, a clear indication of mentorship, and achieving a balanced distribution of diverse students across departments and faculty. Should it not be possible to fund all proposals, priority will be given to students who have not received funding before, students who are majoring in or anticipating majoring in the Earth Sciences, and freshmen and sophomores. Juniors and co-terms will be encouraged to apply for major grants. New undergraduate research fellows and their advisors will be notified prior to Spring Break in order to provide them adequate time to prepare for the summer research.

Student outcomes Students who accept the offer to become summer research fellows in 2010 will be required to:

1. Fully develop their proposals – including a work plan and literature search – and present their proposed work to their peers during the spring quarter in EarthSci 100 (see Appendix V for a syllabus); optionally, students may enroll in Directed Reading units with their research advisor during the spring quarter. 2. Participate in a summer seminar series and field trip when on-campus; 3. Create a poster to be presented at SURPS and/or at a national meeting such as the annual meeting of the American Geophysical Union in San Francisco in December; 4. Give an oral presentation at the School of Earth Sciences Undergraduate Research Symposium in the autumn or spring, or at a departmental seminar series; 5. Participate in evaluating the program by filling out mid-summer and end-summer questionnaires.

Plan for evaluation The plan for evaluation consists of a mid-summer and end-summer evaluation from both students and faculty, submitted through an anonymous web form. In 2009-2010, we used Survey Monkey, but will use Qualtrix in the future. The mid-summer evaluation allows us to see how things are going for students while there is still time to accommodate major changes in individual research plans. These have alerted us to any problems with student-advisor interactions and also allowed us to help students develop alternative plans if they encounter problems. Additionally, we utilize regular course evaluations for EarthSci 100.

The end-summer evaluations have provided excellent feedback regarding the research preparation course and the summer activities, and have shown us the value that students find in becoming part of a community of researchers. This year, we decided to wait until after the presentations to do the final evaluation, so the results are not included in this proposal. Results of course evaluations and some midsummer comments are included in Appendix II.

2010-11 SES Undergraduate Research Program Proposal 5

Budget

Student stipends 25 5600 140000 Summer field trip 1000 Summer seminar 2600 Poster printing, other expenses 2000 Teaching assistant 5600 Sub-total 151200 Matching funds 39200 Total request from VPUE $112,000

Each department and program in the School (Earth Systems, ERE, EESS, GES, Geophysics, and the Dean’s office) has agreed to provide $5600 in matching funds to the 2011 program. These matching funds will be used to cover laboratory expenses, additional program expenses like lunches during the summer and poster printing expenses, as well as student stipends. In addition, STREAM will provide stipends for students who qualify as under-represented minorities and will fund the field trip during the summer; the budget above assumes that STREAM will fund one student, though there may be more. We therefore are requesting funding for stipends for 20 out of our anticipated 25 students.

Appendices I. Summary of participation II. Selected results of evaluation III. List of 2010 participants, their projects and advisors IV. Syllabus of EarthSci 100, Spring 2010

Appendix I. Summary of 2010 and previous participation

I. Summary of participation

The overall number of students and faculty who were funded through the SES Undergraduate Research Program in 2010 went down compared to the previous year (see graph), in part due to budget cuts. Despite this decrease, however, the number of freshman participants increased along with the fraction of participants that were either freshmen or sophomores; we are particularly pleased with this result, as they are our primary target audience. Despite the decrease in the total number of faculty participants, we also had five first-time faculty mentors.

Of the 25 total funded students, 14 will present at the fall SURPS and SES symposia, and the remainder will present their work in the spring. At least two students have been accepted to present their work at the fall meeting of the American Geophysical Union in December. Several have decided to continue with their research, and at least two freshmen (now sophomores) have declared a major or minor in the discipline where they did research.

Appendix II. Selected evaluation results

The final evaluation of the 2009-10 SES Undergraduate Research Program will not be administered to student and faculty participants until after SURPS, but here are some selected results of course evaluations from EarthSci 100 and midsummer evaluations. Full results are available upon request.

EarthSci 100

1. Please comment on the individual instructors with regard to effectiveness and attitude toward students: Strengths • professors were very eager to help me when i had various questions regarding my own research. • Very interesting and knowledgeable PowerPoint presentations and readings. Helped me figure out what this summer research project will mean to me. • very thorough • She is a really nice teacher. Especially the presentations that she gave to students in the beginning of the quarter were really helpful to know. • Well organized class discussion. • Very knowledgeable of every topic discussed, and of presentations in general. You always demanded the very best of , which was really good motivation for me. • Great critical thinker, a bit intimidating at times, but that is how the real world is when one does research • The little advices that he gave to students were very insightful. Also, during the student presentations, he asked • a lot of critical questions that helped other people understand better about the presentation.

Suggestions for Improvement • Another day at the end about work beyond this summer? • N/A

2. Please comment on the strengths and weaknesses, if any, of the textbook(s) and reading(s). What materials were most and least valuable? Why? Strengths • Readings were interesting and easy to process. Liked the anecdotes within them! Some of them had good tips,too. • N/A Suggestions for Improvement • N/A

3. Please comment on assignments and exams (difficulty, length, frequency, usefulness, and their success at testing conceptual understanding rather than recall): Strengths • The final presentation really helped me clarify the work I will be doing this summer, which was good. • Well planned assignments Suggestions for Improvement • N/A

4. Do you have any additional comments on the course over-all? Strengths • definitely feel more prepared for this summer Appendix II. Selected evaluation results

• N/A • There wasn't much "teaching" per-say in this class, but Anne did a great job running it. She's a sweet lady, and the course was interesting and definitely did its job preparing me for research this summer. Overall, I wasn't looking forward to the class, but in retrospect, it was a necessary portion of the process. Suggestions for Improvement • N/A We conduct a midsummer evaluation (a “check-in”, really) of both students and faculty. The next two pages are student responses to two of 6 questions. Full responses to both faculty and student surveys are available by request.

Comments by students in response to the question: If you have been able to attend the seminar, have you found the meetings to be valuable or not? Please describe.

I don't necessarily know if valuable would be the word I'd use. But yes, I have enjoyed the meetings. Being able to see into the depth of different research projects is definitely a good experience and I appreciate the free lunches.

The seminar lectures have been very interesting and I appreciate the opportunity to be part of the discussions.

It is always good to step out from my research and see what other people are doing. I think it refreshes my brain. And having a free lunch with other students is a plus.

Yes. I have learnt a lot about different fields of earth sciences and the current research opportunities available in them.

I have found the talks to be very interesting and worth-while. I have also enjoyed seeing my peers and learning about their progress.

I found most of them very interesting. It's nice to know what other labs are working on.

The lectures have been, for the most part, very interesting as has conversing with speakers at lunch. Brief discussion of progress on research projects was also helpful.

I have enjoyed being able to talk to my peers about their progress and problems etc. Even though, I do find that a lot of times the topic presented isn't interesting, or that the people who attend are eager to leave. It would be nice if the professor presenting would mingle with the students.

Yes. They are interesting.

Some seminars are very interesting. It's nice to hear from the faculty members their work and passions in their field of studies.

I only was able to attend one, and I found it useful to meet with others and discuss progress, but the information presented didn't seem too relevent (except by paying attention to the speakers performance).

Yes!!!!!!!!!!!!! Working all day in a (mostly empty) lab on the same projects often leaves me tied up in small day-to- day problems, and I sometimes get discouraged because I feel like this work isn't exactly my lifelong calling, and it doesn't always go as planned, and I'm afraid that I won't be able to find something I'm truly passionate about. Going to seminars every Wednesday brings me back out to the bigger picture, and some of the talks (especially Steve Palumbi's) have really interested me and shown me other projects that I could be interested in working on in future summers. Wednesdays are excellent, except they make me want to do too many projects!!!!

Yes. Appendix II. Selected evaluation results

I have found most of the meetings to be valuable to me. I enjoyed the Steve Palumbi talk, his research is very thought provoking.

Appendix II. Selected evaluation results

Comments by students in response to the question: In general, how do you feel at this point about your summer research experience?

I'm enjoying the process a lot more than I thought I would. The work isn't overwhelming but its still stimulating. I'm excited to have actual results at the end of summer which prove I've made scientific progress this summer.

I think that I have made good progress but I wish I had more than 10 weeks to work of the project. It has been great! I wouldn't say the work that I am doing is satisfactory, but along the way I learned a lot about academia, research, and professorship, and had a new experience.

I am loving it. Though it went beyond any plans or expectations, Noa has really allowed me to work on all aspects of his sprawling and interdisciplinary project. This has meant for me, learning more about designing and executing good experiments, learning more field techniques, and getting to spend more time in the field (which is always wonderful). Plus because we have three PhD students in IPER essentially living in the same house, one a first year, Noa in his fourth, and a third student in her fifth year, I have learned a lot about the proccess of pursuing science at a professional level and the various stages of research. Also there are five other undergraduates living in our house as well and talking with them about their research and problems/successes had also deepened my overall understanding of hawaiian ecology and provided me with a nice social community. All in all I am enjoying myself very much and learning mucho. Thank you for providing the money to fund this experience.

Its been a pretty humbling experience as far as the work I have been doing. But I think I made the right choice to immerse myself in a challenging project like this.

I am very happy with my summer research experience thus far, and wish that I could attend the summer seminar meetings more often. Unfortunately, they conflict with my work schedule.

I feel that I have had a wonderful experience! I feel very comfortable and independent in the lab. I also feel that my research group is very supportive--- I feel comfortable asking them questions or asking them to clarify any confusing idea. It has been a great match. I am also very satisfied with my work. I have a "perfect" story, very straight-forward and good for a beginner like me in this particular field of high-pressure mineralogy.

I feel pretty satisfied with the work that I have accomplished thus far. All I need to do is make my poster.

It is great! I learnt a lot and met many interesting people.

Optimistic. I feel I've learned an extraordinary amount about a topic I was fairly uneducated on coming into the summer. I am now solidifying technical skills, mainly GIS, in order to analyze the collected data and display it.

I have enjoyed it a lot! Its a bit of a tedious experience, but at the same time very rewarding. I'm looking forward to the rest of the summer!

I had a wonderful experience! I feel so fortunate to have had funding to do all of the amazing work and learn all that I have this summer.

It is still boring, but now I am bored and being challenged by R.

I love being able to live here in my field work location for the entire duration of my summer research experience because it really gives me the opportunity to meet the locals that give me a cultural context to my research, as well as gives me the time to really enjoy and explore this area so I can re-think my research from a more holistic perspective.

Excellent.

Very good. I am in the last couple weeks of my trip, and its getting down to the wire, so Danny and I are hustling to get everything done we wanted to, and making some last minute adjustments. Appendix II. Selected evaluation results

I have learned a ton about phytoplankton, lab work, and bacteria-free culture growing, and I really appreciate having this knowledge. I'm pretty sure that I don't want to continue to do this work after this summer, but I don't consider my research to have been a waste. I'm sad that I haven't been able to get substantial molecular results from my cultures, and that I haven't been able to keep them bacteria-free, especially because they looked free for this first couple of months, but I feel that I could start over and grow completely new cultures, and I would know more about how to keep them bacteria-free. I am glad I have taken on this research experience, even though I didn't get to do any field work this summer - now I know how much I value being out in the field and working with bigger specimens than phytoplankton! I really appreciate the opportunities I have been given to explore both a new topic and my own interests. I'm already looking forward to next summer, when I will hopefully be able to pursue another research topic!

Appendix III. List of 2010 participants, their projects and advisors

2010 Summer Undergraduate Research Fellows in the School of Earth Sciences

Student Yr Project Title Advisor Nicole Aguirre ‘12 Paleoclimate records from the Arctic derived from Elizabeth Miller & Fe-Mn crusts: A first glimpse Kate Maher Hyunghoon Cho ‘13 Real-time visualization of high resolution earthquake Eric Dunham simulations Navid Chowdhury ‘13 Diamondoids at extreme conditions Wendy Mao Jordanna Deana ‘12 Effect of alkalinity on the ocean carbon budget Kate Maher Nicole DeVille ‘12 Size as a determinant for extinction risk: A case Jon Payne study of the fossil record of marine foraminifera Iberia Elster ‘12 An interdisciplinary approach to restoring Hawaiian Gretchen Daily & native forests Rachelle Gould Henry ‘12 Assessment and benchmarking of a new electric Simon Klemperer Engelland-Gay signal digitizer Monica Erviti ‘13 Cope’s Rule in marine foraminifera Jon Payne Gabriela Farfan ‘13 Behavior of siderite and rhodocrosite at Earth’s Wendy Mao lower mantle conditions Jeremy Hoffman ‘11 Reactivity of trace metals on fly ash in combustion Jen Wilcox flue gases Daniel Ibarra ‘12 Validation of the U-isotope paleorainfall proxy using Kate Maher modern soils Robert Kabera ‘11 Optimal integration of renewable and fossil-fuel Lou Durlofsky resources in the developing world Samantha Larson ‘11 Physiological and genetic characterization of the Kevin Arrigo acclimation responses of Arctic phytoplankton to changing sea ice conditions Laura Lilly ‘12 Changes in and implications of photosynthetic Kevin Arrigo characteristics, carbon metabolism, and nutrient requirements of Phaeocystis antarctica and diatoms from the Ross Sea, Antarctica Xi Lu ‘13 Effects of dual porosity on permeability and elastic- Jack Dvorkin wave velocity Casey Maue ‘12 Cultural biogeochemistry: An examination of Peter Vitousek & traditional Hawaiian rain-fed agricultural systems in Noa Lincoln Kona and Kohala Nicholas Murray ‘11 Requirements for innovation: Smallholder Eric Lambin agroforestry in the eastern Brazilian Amazon Appendix III. List of 2010 participants, their projects and advisors

Adelaide Oneal ‘12 Hawaiian agroforestry Peter Vitousek & Noa Lincoln Xueying Ouyang ‘12 The influences of oxygen level on foraminiferal test Jon Payne size during the past 400 million years Jennifer Place ‘12 Ground transportation use and fuel economy Lee Schipper Elise Post ‘11 Effects of soil mineralogy on plant-available silica Scott Fendorf & and phosphorous Peter Vitousek Lucas Prokopiak ‘13 Modeling the shift to oil substitutes: The role of Adam Brandt plug-in electric vehicles Stephen Scheele ‘11 Forecasting biodiversity change: A case study in Gretchen Daily & Costa Rica Danny Karp Sophie Theis ‘11 The drivers and impacts of rapid land use change in Roz Naylor & Brazil: A case study of Santarém Rachael Garrett Siyu Wang ‘13 Advanced biofuels in future transportation systems Adam Brandt

Appendix IV. EarthSci 100 syllabus

EarthSci 100 Research Preparation Syllabus Spring 2010

Instructors Anne Egger [email protected] Phone: 724-0984 Office: 320-112 Simon Klemperer [email protected] Phone: 723-8214 Office: Mitchell 353

Class meetings Monday, 4:15 – 5:05 pm, Mitchell 350

Course overview This 1-unit seminar is geared towards undergraduate students who will be conducting research in the School of Earth Sciences over the summer. In designing this class, we had three main goals in mind: • To introduce you to (or reinforce your knowledge of) the process of scientific research • To prepare you to have a successful summer research experience • To build an active community of researchers within the school To achieve those three goals, the course includes a few assignments that help you focus in on your project, learn more about your proposed work, your research group, and the culture of research here in the school, and that give you the opportunity to hear more about what your fellow researchers will be up to over the summer.

Course materials and grading There is no required textbook or reader for this course. All readings, assignments, lectures, and additional resources are (or will be) available on CourseWork. You will submit assignments there as well. The course is only available as S/NC. You are required to complete all assignments to receive an S for the course.

Your Responsibilities 1. Come to class ready to participate. 2. Respect your instructors and your classmates, and we will return the favor. Respect includes creating an environment conducive to learning, which means being on time, turning off cell phones and laptops, listening, and contributing. 3. Special Accommodations: If you need special learning accommodations, it is important that we know about it as soon as possible. Requests for accommodation are initiated by the student through the Office of Accessible Education (http://www.stanford.edu/group/DRC/). Accommodations cannot be made unless pre- approved by the OAE.

Appendix IV. EarthSci 100 syllabus

Schedule Topics and activities What’s due Mon, Introduction Mar. 29 Course requirements, what you’ve signed up for Anne Words of wisdom from past researchers Kate Lowry, others TBA Fri., Apr. 2, 8:00 am 1: Self-assessment Mon, The process of scientific research I Reading: The Practice of Science, April 5 Becoming a scientist, the culture of research in the school Anne Scientists and the Scientific Community Mon, The process of scientific research II Reading: Scientific ethics April 12 Developing a work plan, communicating with your advisor Acting ethically and responsibly Anne Fri., Apr. 16, 8:00 am 2: Questions with mentor Mon, Scientific communication Reading: Understanding Scientific April 19 Using the literature, presenting your work Anne Journal Articles, Utilizing the Scientific Literature Fri., Apr. 23, 8:00 am 3: Paper summary Mon, Student presentations April 26 TBA Friday, SES Research Review April 30 12:00-6:30 pm, Y2E2 Red Atrium Mon, Student presentations May 3 TBA Fri., May 7, 8:00 am 4: Research Review reaction Mon, Student presentations May 10 TBA Fri., May 14, 8:00 am 5: Reflection on presentation Mon, Student presentations May 17 TBA Fri., May 21, 8:00 am 6: Revised work plan Mon, The future: graduate school and careers May 24 Different types of success – TBA Beyond undergraduate research – Jerry Harris Mon, No class, Memorial Day May 31

Center for East Asian Studies Proposal for VPUE Departmental Grants for Undergraduate Research, 2010-11

The Center for East Asian Studies seeks funding for undergraduate research fellowships to engage undergraduate students with current research on topics in East Asia. After a general call for submissions from all East Asian Studies faculty, CEAS has selected three projects of broad interest in the social sciences to be included in this request for undergraduate research support in 2010-11. These awards will be managed by the Center for East Asian Studies on behalf of the constituent faculty members. The Center Director, Kären Wigen, will provide general academic oversight, while day-to-day administrative issues will be handled by Associate Director, John Groschwitz.

Students will be selected to participate in the three research projects through competitive applications to each relevant faculty leader, and will be required to show relevant coursework in the target area, demonstrate adequate language ability, and to explain the probable impact on and benefit for their future studies.

Students will be introduced to the project goals by their faculty mentors, and will receive training in project-specific methodologies and/or research tools (including the use of statistical modeling software, survey creation and data collection, etc.) over the course of the project. During the course of each project students will meet with their respective faculty mentor on a regular basis, and often will enroll in one or more related courses taught by the instructors.

Past VPUE-funded research proposals have resulted in presented lectures and published articles by the concerned faculty which directly utilized student-managed data. Students have also utilized research or fieldwork experience as a base for their own papers or presentations in related classes. Future goals for VPUE-sponsored grants would include providing undergrads with a regularized forum (lecture or workshop) in which to relate what skills have been learned and how this opportunity has affected their studies. 2010-11 project details are:

Melissa Brown Assistant Professor, Anthropology Two to three research assistants will help Professor Brown on three inter-related research projects: “Female Labor and Household Production in China’s Economic Transformation”, “Marriage Forms, Son Preferences, and Sex Ratios in Taiwan”, and “Female Deficit, Unmarried Men and Social Stability in China.” Researchers will be working with ethnographic interview data, Chinese census statistics, and a Taiwanese household register database. Training on various software programs, including SPSS and/or R, plus databases, will be incorporated over the course of the project. In addition, one student researcher will conduct fieldwork surveys in China with Professor Brown in summer 2011.

Matthew Kohrman Associate Professor, Anthropology; Research Affiliate and Senior Fellow, Asia Health Policy Program, Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center, Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies Two students assigned to Prof. Matthew Kohrman will receive mentorship while working on projects having to do with the health and sociopolitics of tobacco and tobacco control in China. Project titles include (1) “Warning Labels, Cigarettes, and Experimental Auctions in China,” (2) “Learning from Others: Smoking Cessation in Urban China,” and (3) “Clouds: Making Life and Death in China’s Cigarette Market.” Student tasks will include but not be limited to transcribing interview tapes, carrying out online and library- based research, coding and analyzing quantitative data, preparing slides for conference presentations, copyediting and formatting grant proposals and manuscripts, and collecting field data in China. Students will learn a variety of skills, including how to manage confidentiality of research participants, use software programs like SPSS, PowerPoint, and Endnote, collect data from online archives such as China Academic Journals, PubMed, and The Legacy Tobacco Documents Library, and manage one-on-one and group interviews in Chinese cultural contexts.

Xueguang Zhou Professor, Sociology; Senior Fellow, Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies One student will work on a research project on elite mobility in the Chinese bureaucracy. The main purpose of the research project is to collect data on patterns of cadre mobility in selected Chinese regions and examine, through the flow of personnel, the interconnectedness of bureaucratic offices in the Chinese bureaucracy, as well as help answer questions about the incentives and capacities of mobilization in the Chinese organizations. The RA’s main responsibility will be to collect data and conduct data analysis on this project. Since last year, we have already begun the data collection process, and the RA will help us consolidate the data already collected and start the process of data analysis. The student can learn real processes of conducting social science research, from data collection, data cleaning, to data analysis and report writing. Professor Zhou will have weekly meetings with the RA, and he/she will also have frequent contact with the graduate student who works on this project. This process is a continuous, interactive experience. Professor Zhou has followed these practices in previous VPUE funding and both the student and he felt this is a fruitful experience. He is additionally requesting $3,500 to support the RA’s travel to China (San Francisco – Beijing airfare and living costs) in the summer so that he/she can help gather data in China. Some of the data (such as local newspapers or other publications at the county or prefecture level) can be accessed only in China. Professor Zhou will travel to China in the summer to conduct research and supervise the RA’s work directly.

Center for East Asian Studies 2010-11 VPUE Grant Request Budget

Autumn Winter Spring Summer Brown Student 1 $1,400 $1,400 $1,400 $5,600 Brown Student 2 $1,400 $1,400 $1,400 $5,600 Kohrman Student 1 $1,400 $1,400 $1,400 $5,600 Kohrman Student 2 $1,400 $1,400 $1,400 $5,600 Zhou Student 1 $1,400 $1,400 $1,400 $5,600 Zhou Travel $3,500 Subtotal $7,000 $7,000 $7,000 $31,500 Total $52,500

Center for Education Policy Analysis Undergraduate Research Program Proposal for 2010-2011 VPUE Departmental Grant for Undergraduate Research

Summary The Center for Education Policy Analysis (CEPA) is requesting funding to support undergraduate participation in directed research projects. The purpose of our proposed program is to increase the involvement of Stanford undergraduates in education policy research. To do this, we will undertake a pilot initiative in which we will match a small number of students with CEPA faculty mentors and provide them with stipends for part-time research during the academic year and/or full-time research during the summer. In following pages, we describe CEPA, how our program will meet the RFP requirements, and discuss how we will meet the stated VPUE selection criteria.

Research Program Goals About CEPA: CEPA is an independent research center which unites an array of nationally prominent scholars from multiple disciplines across the university to provide depth and scale of research needed to guide education policy in meaningful ways. Our rigorous inquiry is based on the empirical realities of schools, well grounded in the needs of policy makers and education practitioners, and aimed directly at improving education for all students. We are committed to making sustained improvement in the education of all students which we believe begins with training the next generation of education policy scholars. Involving undergraduates in education policy research is critical to our mission and, as such, we are proposing a new CEPA Undergraduate Research Program (CEPA URP) which will provide structured opportunities for undergraduates who would like to become actively involved with education policy research as research assistants, RAs.

Specifically the goals of CEPA URP will include: 1. Allowing students interested in education policy research an opportunity to work directly with a faculty mentor on an active research project. 2. Providing learning opportunities for students to increase their substantive and technical skills which will allow them to pursue future independent research projects at the undergraduate or graduate level. 3. Providing faculty with valuable assistance on research projects. 4. Creating a community where undergraduates interested in education policy have opportunities for interaction and collaboration with like-minded peers, graduate students, and faculty.

Organizational Structure CEPA is housed in the School of Education but our faculty affiliates come from the Schools of Education, Law, and Business and the departments of Economics, Sociology, Political Science, and Philosophy. We currently have 17 faculty affiliates from across the university.

The following people will oversee the administration of our proposed program: • Michelle Reininger, Executive Director, CEPA • Susanna Loeb, Faculty Director, CEPA • Ululani Pomeroy, Finance and Operations Manager, CEPA • Caprie Davenport, Administrative Assistant, CEPA

1

If CEPA is fortunate enough to receive funding for our program, we will solicit applications from faculty and undergraduates immediately upon receipt of this grant (details below). Professors Reininger and Loeb will select and match faculty and students based on alignment of research interests and skill sets. Since this will be our first year offering this program, we will solicit feedback from faculty and students regarding the successes, struggles, and areas in which the program may need improvement. Our goal is to create a sustained undergraduate research program at CEPA that faculty and undergraduate students will regard as a rewarding learning opportunity.

Recruitment Plans and Selection Criteria for Faculty Mentors In our pilot year we will select faculty mentors based on their expressed interest in working with undergraduate students. We will email a request for proposals to faculty members to solicit participation of faculty mentors in the program. In this request, we will ask faculty to include a description of the research project the student will be working on, the specific tasks the faculty anticipates the student will perform, the qualifications the undergraduate should have, and the ways in which the faculty plans to provide mentorship and feedback to the student. Faculty will be able to apply with a specific student/s in mind or can apply directly to CEPA to be matched to an interested student.

Faculty proposals will be selected based on the opportunity they present for collaborative research with undergraduates, and more specifically, the extent to which their projects address the following: • Strong faculty mentorship plan for the student • Student training in methodologies and analysis that facilitate future projects of a more independent nature • Student intellectual engagement with faculty mentor’s broader research interests • Student inclusion in scholarly community of fellow researchers

We plan to fund up to four students for participation in research projects during the Winter, Spring, and Summer quarters in our first year.

Examples of Potential Projects and Student Responsibilities Project 1: The Causes and Patterns of Racial/Ethnic, Socioeconomic, and Gender Achievement Gaps In this project, we will collect and analyze data on the magnitude of achievement gaps in each state, the trends in these gaps over the last decade, the patterns of development of these gaps as children progress through school, the variation in these gaps across academic subjects, and the relationship of these gaps to state educational policies. Although there is considerable extant data on achievement gaps, such as that from the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), these data are limited in many ways in their ability to illuminate trends, patterns, and causes of achievement gaps. The NAEP tests only test math and reading, are given to only to samples of students (roughly 2000 per state) in each state, are given only in grades 4 and 8, and are administered only every few years.

An alternate source of data for examining achievement gaps is student test scores on state tests. These tests have the advantage of being given every year (at least since the early 2000s, and earlier in some states), in many grades (grades 3-8 at a minimum in all states), in multiple subjects, and to all students in the state. Such data could, in principle, provide a much more detailed look at the patterns and trends in achievement gap than is possible with other data, such as that from NAEP.

There is no single source for these state test score data, however, which is why they have never been comprehensively used to study achievement gaps and their sources. In order to use them, therefore, we must contact state departments of education and search public websites.

2

Project objectives include: i) Compiling a comprehensive database of state test score data, ii) using data to compute test score gaps by race, gender, and free/reduced-price lunch eligibility status, and iii) analyzing the patterns of these gaps and their relationship to state policies.

Student Responsibilities: • Assist in the collection and compilation of the data. This may involve contacting state departments of education, searching and downloading data from multiple websites, and/or writing automated “web-scraping” programs to systematically download data from websites when full data files are unavailable. • Assist in the analysis of these data. • Participate in weekly meetings of the research team including Professor Reardon and several PhD research assistants. Undergraduate RAs will have opportunities to learn to use Stata statistical software and to conduct basic descriptive statistical analyses.

Project 2: School Leadership Research This project examines the career paths of principals and teachers, district policies that affect the distribution of human resources across schools, and the impact of educator characteristics and mobility patterns on student outcomes. This multi-year study analyzes and identifies the personal characteristics, preparation experiences, behaviors and orientations of school leaders that positively impact student outcomes. The data include longitudinal staff, student, and school data from district administrative databases, surveys of teachers and school leaders, and principal observational data.

Student Responsibilities: • Assist in coding of survey data from principal and teacher surveys. • Collect and enter principal observation data based on coding schemes designed by the research team. • Conduct basic statistical analyses using Stata statistical software. • Participate in bi-weekly meetings of the research team including Professor Loeb and several PhD research assistants to discuss research design and methods and solicit input from team members.

Project 3: How Families Choose Schools: The Role of Information and Support in Parental School Choice This project examines which criteria families use to select schools for their children; whether these families choose differently when provided with information about school performance and support with their decision-making; whether providing school performance data affects choices by filling in gaps in knowledge about schools or by influencing the criteria that parents use to select schools; and how choice school districts can improve the choice process to create greater benefits for parents and students.

Student Responsibilities: • Assist in recruiting private and charter schools to participate in the study. • Create materials to distribute to families which will aid in determining the role information plays in parents’ decisions about where to send their children to school. • Design and distribute parent surveys using a web-based survey system.

3

• Participate in bi-weekly meetings of the research team including Professor Loeb and several PhD research assistants to discuss research design and methods and solicit input from team members.

Project 4: Using Early Literacy Assessment to Inform Instruction This project will introduce a district-wide early literacy formative assessment into a district that currently does not have one and track the implementation and effects on teachers and students. This assessment will help teachers evaluate the abilities of their students and pinpoint instruction as needed.

Student Responsibilities: • Assist in providing teachers with support in administering the assessments and using the results to guide instruction. • Design and distribute teacher surveys. • Conduct basic statistical analyses using Stata statistical software. • Participate in bi-weekly meetings of the research team including Professor Loeb and several PhD research assistants to discuss research design and methods and solicit input from team members.

Plans for Recruitment and Selection of Students Undergraduates will be recruited using fliers posted in the Departments of Economics, Sociology, Public Policy, and Statistics – departments where undergraduate students are likely to have substantive interests in education, inequality, and policy as well as in the School of Education. The call for applicants will also be posted on the CEPA website and we will ask faculty who teach the core courses in the Education Research and Policy minor program to announce the research program in their courses. We will also use email lists to distribute the program announcements. Fliers and announcements will be posted in Fall, 2010, seeking students to begin work on projects in Winter 2011.

Means by which Students will be Matched with Mentors Students will be matched with mentors based on two scenarios. The first scenario is the nomination of a student by a faculty member. A professor may nominate a student with whom they want to work by presenting a letter to CEPA’s Executive Director making the case for the student’s selection. This letter should indicate why this student is the best choice for the project. The second scenario (which would arise if a professor does not have a pre-selected student in mind OR the professor’s justification for selecting a student is not approved by the CEPA Executive Director) is that student selection will be made from the pool of applicants who submit a written statement expressing their interest in the opportunity and what they hope to achieve. Faculty members will read these applications and determine how the applicants’ interests and backgrounds mesh with their area of need / project they are proposing. A small number of interviews will be held with finalists. Upon approval by the Executive Director, the student will be invited by his or her faculty mentor to partake in the program.

Specific student assignments, deliverables, or presentations Each faculty mentor will decide upon specific assignments, deliverables, and presentations appropriate for the undergraduate RA. Each CEPA RA will: • Have an initial intake meeting with the CEPA Executive Director and their faculty mentor to acclimatize them to CEPA. • Sign an agreement that outlines specific expectations, requirements, and schedule. The faculty mentor will also sign this agreement.

4

• Upon completion of the RA work with their faculty mentor, there will be an extensive exit interview (and/or) survey with each student so we can determine what worked with them, what they benefited most from, and what could be improved upon in the future. We are very interested in making their time with us as educational, interesting, and productive as possible. We believe this type of follow-up and due diligence will help us in planning for a possible Year 2. We will also pay close attention to the results of the centrally administered VPUE survey.

Strategies for providing mentorship, including 1) training and resources available to new or inexperienced mentors, and 2) guidance, resources, and feedback available to students We are fortunate to be housed within the School of Education. With in-house expertise, we believe that SUSE is well situated to provide the type of training our faculty mentors might need so they are well- equipped to provide appropriate guidance, resources, and feedback to students. Should the need arise for faculty mentor support or guidance the Executive Director will seek out the appropriate supports within the School of Education to assist the faculty mentor.

Outcomes of past programs and ideas for improvement of student experiences We are a new center and this will be our first time applying for VPUE funding.

Student intellectual engagement with faculty mentors’ broader research interests/ Student inclusion in a scholarly community of fellow researchers As noted above, the primary source of guidance will be the weekly or bi-weekly project team meetings. These will provide the undergraduate RAs will exposure to research methods and practices, as well as opportunities to learn both from their faculty mentors and the other research assistants, including the PhD student research assistants. This vertical integration (undergraduates working with PhD students and with faculty) provides a range of opportunities for mentoring, networking, and feedback. Undergraduate RAs will also be invited to attend our bi-weekly CEPA seminar series.

Budget Depending on the interest in this new program we would like to fund up to 4 undergraduate RAs to work part-time in the winter and spring quarters and part- or full-time in the summer.

Wages Academic Quarters: 4 students x 2 quarters (winter + spring) x 10 hrs/week x 10 weeks = 800 hours @ $14/hour = $11,200

Summer Quarter: Option A (2 full-time summer students): 2 students x 40 hours/week x 10 weeks = 800 hours @ $14/hour = $11,200

Option B (4 part-time summer students): 4 students X 20 hours/week x 10 weeks = 800 @ $14/hour = $11,200

Total Estimated Cost: $11,200 (academic quarter wages) + $11,200 (summer quarter wages) = $22,400

5

Community-Based Research Fellows Program (Haas Center for Public Service)

I. Program’s Goals Community-based research is defined as “a partnership of students, faculty, and community members who collaboratively engage in research with the purpose of solving a pressing problem or effecting social change” (Strand et al. 2003:3). It represents a powerful model of engaged scholarship, which connects abstract and experiential forms of knowledge with concrete action.

The Community-Based Research Fellows Program (CBRFP) brings together faculty, undergraduate students, and community partners who use community-identified assets and needs to establish the parameters of inquiry and realize the potential for social action. The CBRFP has four primary goals: (1) deepen the connection between faculty and undergraduate students engaged in community-based research; (2) create a support network for undergraduate students that facilitates their research, develops their research skills, and connects them with similarly motivated peers; (3) provide resources for community-based research teams that comprise faculty, undergraduate students, and community partners; and (4) identify the tensions in campus-community partnerships and develop strategies to address them.

As undergraduate students refine their research interests, hone their research skills, and progress in their academic studies, the CBRFP expects that they will apply for other undergraduate research grants and fellowships.

II. Program’s Organizational Structure Stanford faculty from across campus will submit applications for community-based research opportunities for the spring and/or summer terms. Faculty applications will describe the objectives and goals of the research project, the expected deliverables, how the research project furthers the student’s educational goals, the mentoring plan for the student, how the research project relates to the faculty member’s research interests, and how the project benefits the community partner. Faculty members will be encouraged to identify an undergraduate student and to include a letter of support from the community partner at the time of application. Each community-based research team will comprise one faculty member, one to two students, and one community partner – all of whom will become CBRFP Fellows if awarded funding.

Undergraduate students will work directly with faculty to explore research methodologies and develop research skills. Faculty will identify the community partners with whom students will work. (A student wishing to initiate a research project with a community partner must approach a faculty member who is willing to apply on the student’s behalf.) Throughout the course of the research project, community-based research teams will be expected to meet regularly to manage expectations, monitor progress, and create deliverables and other research products. Ideally, both the research process and products will benefit all partners: students will gain specific research skills, faculty will envision future research and teaching opportunities, and community partners will meet their needs and build capacity.

The Haas Center’s Director for Public Service Research, Virginia Visconti, Ph.D., is the primary administrator of the CBRFP. (She has held this role since 2008 when she joined the staff of the Haas Center.) Drawing upon her training as a social-cultural anthropologist and educator, she will serve as a key community-based research resource for faculty, students, and community partners and meet with them regularly at the Haas Center and off campus during site visits. In addition, she will manage the CBRFP’s budget, which includes Haas Center matching funds to cover honoraria for faculty and community partners ($1000 each) and receptions that accompany research presentations and meetings.

III. Faculty Mentor Recruitment and Selection Following funding approval from VPUE, faculty members will be recruited for participation in the CBRFP through a university-wide request for proposals. Members of the Haas Center's Faculty Steering Committee will be instrumental in the recruitment process as well. Successful proposals will include:

• A well-defined research project that warrants a community-based research approach • Incorporation of best practices and principles of campus-community partnerships (e.g., Principles of Partnerships available at http://studentaffairs.stanford.edu/haas/cbrfellows/principles) • Community partner support for the research project (e.g., a letter from the community partner that indicates how the research will meet its needs) • A clear plan for mentoring students

IV. Examples of Previous Project Objectives and Student Responsibilities Below are excerpts from the 2009-10 Student Fellows’ midterm and final research progress reports, which provide evidence of the transformative impact of community-based research for the development of students’ knowledge, skills, and values. (Please see section VIII for project descriptions.)

This experience has definitely made me more excited about pursuing community-based research in the future. While I plan to continue pursuing research in public health, I hope that my future research has a stronger focus on working toward social justice. Working on this project has helped me learn practical research skills, such as how to run a focus group, as well as more general skills, such as how to communicate and collaborate effectively with a team. It has also helped me further define my attitudes and values surrounding community-based research. I hope that I can take the skills and knowledge I’ve gained from this project, and apply them to future projects that seek to understand and address health and social disparities. In addition, I hope I can continue to improve my understanding of designing, executing, and analyzing complex research projects. -- Eileen Baca ’11 (worked with Dr. Catherine Heaney, Stanford Prevention Research Center, and the Ohio 4-H Program)

I enjoy working with numbers, but I’ve found I also really enjoy qualitative research. I think people are truly fascinating and their ideas and motivations are really unique. I’ve thought quite a lot about the future this summer, and this experience has made me consider public health much more. It’s an interesting combination of quantitative and qualitative, and would allow me to address issues related to community food systems or environmental quality and health implications. Overall, while I do plan to engage in quantitative research in my engineering major in the future, I would love to conduct more qualitative research, and especially CBR-type projects. -- Yoshika Crider ’12 (worked with Dr. Walter Falcon, Food Security and the Environment Program, and the Kansas Rural Center)

I found it very rewarding to conduct community-based research and would like to do so again in the future. I felt that my research was truly worthwhile, not only because I uncovered new information about the health of Oregon’s migrant farm workers, but because I was able to point to ways to more effectively diminish health inequities by sharing that information with my community partner. -- Rahael Gupta ’12 (worked with Dr. Donald Barr, Pediatrics and HumBio, and the Virginia Garcia Memorial Health Center)

2 I learned about the intersection of city policy, planning and individual organizational work through attending meetings and sharing an office with Beth. Beth is very open with me about all the work she does on grants, on projects, programs, and day-to-day management. This was a process I had wanted to learn, and to weigh my interest in. I have also learned about the local food system through interviews and volunteering, local youth involvement in green initiatives through youth focus groups and interviews, and am in the process of learning to prepare a presentation that will engage many different community partners. -- Annika Ozinskas Co-term (worked with Dr. Milbrey McLaughlin and Mary Hofstedt, John Gardner Center, and Beth Ross, Environmental Initiatives Manager for Redwood City)

V. Student Recruitment and Selection Faculty members will select the students with whom they and community partners will work. If a student is not identified at the time of application, the Haas Center will assist faculty who have been awarded CBRFP funding with the recruitment process.

VI. Student Activities Students who participate in the CBRFP will meet monthly with the program administrator to share their research progress and discuss readings that promote intellectual development and demonstrate connections between research and positive social change. Specific topics will include the principles and practices of community-based research, methods for forging campus- community partnerships, and the ethical dimensions of data ownership and dissemination.

Specific assignments, deliverables, and presentations: • Learning Plan -- Students will create a learning plan with input from faculty mentors and community partners. The learning plan is intended to help students articulate, prioritize, and gain support for what they want to learn and accomplish during their community- based research experience. • Blog and Progress Reports -- Students will contribute regularly to a blog and submit research progress reports to the program administrator at the end of the spring quarter and/or summer. The blog and reports will allow students to document their training and research activities, reflect upon the benefit of the research project for community partners, and clarify their academic and research interests. • Community Partner Briefings – The program administrator will urge students to provide their community partners with regular briefings throughout the course of the research project. • Final Presentations -- Students will present their research and field questions during an autumn quarter celebratory luncheon. The Center for Teaching and Learning will videotape these presentations so that students can review their performance and strengthen their oral communication skills – a valuable asset for any researcher eager to communicate effectively with academic peers and community partners.

Since the program administrator also teaches Urban Studies 123: Approaching Research with Communities, which offers an introduction to community-based research, students will be invited to visit the class and share their success stories and challenges.

The CBRFP will encourage students to present at SURPS, apply for research grants and fellowships through the Haas Center and VPUE, and build upon their community-based research fellowship experience with coursework that further develops their research skills.

3

VII. Strategies for Providing Mentorship In early spring 2011, the CBRFP will host a welcome luncheon and orientation for all community-based research teams. The event will give members of all teams an opportunity to meet one another and learn more about the structure and expectations of the CBRFP.

The program administrator will also complement the student mentoring strategies that faculty and community partners employ. Students will use monthly meetings with their peers and the program administrator to discuss challenges and solve problems collaboratively. Given students’ often diverse disciplinary backgrounds and research projects, the monthly meetings will expose them to new and multiple perspectives on a wide range of topics and allow them to invest deeply in one another’s learning. Occasionally, additional participants may be invited to join the dialogue and share insights about how to maintain campus-community partnerships, integrate innovative methodologies, and produce high quality community-based translations of research findings.

The program administrator will continue to take a hands-on approach and welcome opportunities to meet with faculty and community partners on and off campus. During the spring and summer 2010 program cycle, the program administrator (at her own expense) conducted off-campus site visits with research teams in Kansas, Ohio, and Oregon.

In conjunction with site visits, quarterly research progress reports are tools for evaluating student learning and engagement. Taken together, they provide the program administrator with valuable feedback that will inform future program development.

VIII. Previous Years’ Outcomes and Ideas for Improvement Past student participants have presented research posters at SURPS and national conferences, applied for additional grants and fellowships, and written honors theses. The have produced an impressive array of deliverables, including curricula and training manuals for non-profit organizations, as well as data collection instruments for governmental agencies. Their research has contributed to the strategic planning of municipal governments and the efforts of those advocating on behalf of marginalized populations.

Importantly, the CBRFP tracks the progress of the community-based research teams that receive funding. Below is a brief overview of the 2009-10 teams and their research projects.

Faculty Fellow: Catherine Heaney (Stanford Prevention Research Center) Student Fellow: Eileen Baca '11 (Human Biology) Community Partner: Ohio 4-H Program

The team received funding to develop and evaluate interventions to reduce the risk of agricultural injury among 9-14 year olds. This past summer, Stanford and Ohio State University researchers, along with Ohio 4-H educators, conducted a controlled randomized trial to compare the effectiveness of family-based and parent-focused interventions with a control group. Data analysis is underway.

Faculty Fellow: Walter Falcon (Food Security and the Environment Program) Student Fellow: Yoshika Crider '12 (Environmental Engineering) Community Partner: Kansas Rural Center

4 The team received funding to explore conceptions of sustainable agriculture among growers in two regions of Kansas. Over the course of the summer, Yoshika Crider interviewed 33 farmers and ranchers about their perspectives on sustainability. Community partner feedback indicates that the research will enhance its outreach efforts. A project overview and preliminary data analysis have been published in a recent edition of the Kansas Rural Center’s newsletter. If funds permit, Yoshika will meet with growers and Center staff during their annual fall gathering in November. She will also present her research during the 2010 SURPS.

Faculty Fellow: Donald Barr (Pediatrics, Program in Human Biology) Student Fellow: Rahael Gupta '12 (Human Biology) Community Partner: Virginia Garcia Memorial Health Center

The team received funding to investigate the health status and health awareness of migrant farm workers in Oregon. Throughout the summer, Rahael Gupta interviewed migrant farm workers and supported the Health Center’s outreach efforts. She regularly shared the analysis of interview data with her community partners, who will now use the knowledge to tailor their services to meet the needs of the farm worker community more effectively. The Health Center has requested that Rahael return next summer to continue the research as part of an honors thesis project. She has also been invited to present the research at the Western Migrant Stream Forum in February 2011.

Faculty Fellow: Milbrey McLaughlin (School of Education and John Gardner Center) Student Fellow: Annika Ozinskas (Co-term, Earth Systems) Community Partner: Beth Ross, Environmental Initiatives Manager for Redwood City

The team received funding to explore local food systems and their intersections with community wellness and youth development. Following the conclusion of the project, Annika Ozinskas made a formal presentation to local government officials, non-profit personnel, and other interested stakeholders at the City Council Chambers of Redwood City. The presentation catalyzed a spirited dialogue and the creation of action items supporting Redwood City 2020, a collaboration of public and private organizations dedicated to ensuring the health and success of all children, youth, and families served by the Redwood City School District (www.rwc202.org).

Improvements: In the 2010-11 academic year, the CBRFP will retain its primary components and make several improvements. First, the CBRFP will offer more structured assistance in the dissemination of data and the production of deliverables. Second, because student participants are often overseas during the fall term, the CBRFP will offer additional opportunities for presentations (e.g., end-of-year research presentation events that currently highlight the work of the Haas Center’s Public Service Scholars Program and Andrea Naomi Leiderman Fellowship Program participants). Third, upon receipt of the VPUE online survey data, the program administrator will seek to incorporate student feedback to improve the structure and operation of the CBRFP.

IX. Budget

The CBRFP is entering a growth phase and seeking to expand its outreach efforts. The VPUE Departmental Grant for Undergraduate Research is a critical element in this process. Therefore, we propose a modest increase to the budget submitted for the 2009-10 academic

5 year, which included support for four summer students and four spring quarter part-time students only.

2010-11 Budget Five summer students at $5600 each $28,000 Five spring quarter part-time students at $1400 each $7,000 Five poster session supplies $125

Works Cited Strand, K. et al. (2003). Community-based research and higher education: Principles and practices. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

6

Proposal for a VPUE Departmental Grant for Undergraduate Research Submitted by the Program in Human Biology October 13, 2010 Contacts: Katherine Preston, Assoc. Director; Linda Barghi, Program Manager

Introduction Each summer, the Program in Human Biology offers a summer research experience to students through the Human Biology Research Exploration (HB-REX) program, funded by a VPUE Departmental Grant. The program has been extremely popular and has helped Human Biology meet our goal of welcoming students into Stanford’s research community. We are requesting funding to continue this important program.

Research program goals The Human Biology Research Exploration (HB-REX) program strives to expose as many students as possible to research experience by helping them make connections with faculty across the University early in their Stanford career. HB-REX is designed for students who have just finished their sophomore year and completed the Human Biology Core course sequence. The Core provides them a basic grounding in biology, integrated with systematic lectures in anthropology, biopsychology, and economics, focusing on basic research as well as social and policy implications. After the Core, students are ready to join a research group where they can acquire the conceptual and methodological basis of experimental science within a professional setting. Importantly, this opportunity comes when most students still have two years in which to build a serious independent research project if they so choose. Over the past several years, a substantial fraction of HB-REX interns have continued their research beyond the internship, and they have above-average success when they apply to our Honors Program.

Research program structure and organization The HB-REX program enables declared Human Biology majors to work with experienced research mentors during the summer following their sophomore year. They are mentored by faculty from natural and social science departments in Humanities and Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. Both the intern and the mentor sign a contract which contains a description of the research plan, the weekly research schedule, and the number of weeks of the contract. Our goal is for students to contribute meaningfully to a project in which the faculty member is actively involved. We do not expect all interns to do an independent project, however they should understand the questions motivating their group’s research, participate in regular research meetings, and learn how to conduct a study and interpret results. All HB-REX interns present their research in a professional-style poster symposium in August which is attended by faculty mentors, members of their research group, and other students. In late July, interns gather for a picnic where they share their experiences with each other and with HB-REX organizers Russ Fernald, Katherine Preston, and Linda Barghi.

Mentor recruitment and selection Many of our mentors have participated in the HB-REX program for several years, and often they continue to advise students through honors thesis projects. We encourage these proven mentors to keep working with HB-REX. Some new mentors are recruited directly by students who have applied to the program. Each year we solicit project titles and descriptions from known mentors, and we advertise to Human Biology faculty more broadly. We screen submitted projects to ensure they are appropriate for the program in terms of content, scope, and supervision. We also consider student comments about their experiences with individual mentors.

Project objectives and student responsibilities Project objectives vary widely among mentors, but we ask them all to integrate interns into the daily life of their research group and to provide interns with a rewarding research experience. Students are expected to be productive and considerate members of the research group. By signing a contract, interns and mentors agree on their mutual expectations. We do not yet have a list of projects for 2011, but a list of projects, mentors, and students from 2010 is appended.

Student recruitment and selection Most of the students eligible for the HB-REX program begin the Core course sequence in fall quarter, making it very easy to recruit within this group. The Core Course Associates who work closely with smaller sets of students have agreed to help identify students who should be specifically encouraged to apply. We also advertise the program in our newsletter, the HumBio Buzz. We begin recruiting sophomores through information sessions in late November, and we encourage them to talk with us individually in December and January about their research interests. By the time they apply, some students have already begun to work with an appropriate and supportive faculty member, and they do not need to be matched with anyone. To accommodate students who do need to be matched, we will use the system we introduced in 2010. In late fall, we will publish the faculty-submitted project descriptions on our website, organized by general topic. In mid- to late January, students will file a preliminary application ranking up to three posted projects that interest them. (Students who already have a committed mentor will provide that mentor’s name along with a project description for evaluation.) The preliminary applications allow us to see the distribution of applications among projects. We will screen the candidates for each project and ask some or all of them to submit a full application to that project, including a paragraph describing their interests in it. A student could be asked to apply for all three of his or her indicated projects if s/he is appropriately matched. Once again, we will hold a workshop to guide students in writing their paragraphs and to prepare them to talk with faculty. We will then ask each faculty mentor how many applicants s/he wants to consider, either on paper or in person, and we will pass the applications on to the faculty member. Once the faculty choose their interns, and the interns have accepted, we will generate the contracts. We feel that this system gives faculty the flexibility to choose students based on their own set of criteria and encourages students to think carefully about their interests and articulate their reasons for choosing a particular project. The new low-stakes preliminary application seemed to encourage many more students to consider participating in HB-REX in 2010 compared to prior years. Last winter over 100 students submitted preliminary applications. Although we were able to fund only about one-third of applicants, we believe that the larger initial pool was good for the program: faculty comments suggest that some funded students might not have applied under the prior system. We will continue the practice of having interns and faculty negotiate and sign research contracts. We have found that the contracts require conversations about mutual expectations and encourage serious commitment by both interns and faculty to the success of the internship.

Student products Midway through the program, the interns meet informally over a picnic dinner with the program organizers to talk about their experiences and the challenges and rewards of their projects. In the final week of the program, the interns present scientific posters at a formal session where faculty and other students discuss the projects. The interns have told us how much they enjoyed the poster symposium and the opportunity to share their work with others. The response from faculty has also been strongly positive, with several faculty commenting to us this past August on the high quality of the posters and presentations. We aim to make the poster session as professional as possible, to reflect what students might experience at a national meeting in their field. For the past two years we have held a workshop a week before the symposium about poster design and presentation, and we sent a list of other resources for poster design to all of the interns. The Program in Human Biology purchased a wide-format printer in 2009, which significantly reduced the cost of printing relative to previous years and allowed interns an extra week to work on their posters.

Strategies for supporting inexperienced faculty mentors In the past, we have provided informal training to all mentors in various ways. The contract signed by interns and faculty provides structure and outlines expectations for both interns and faculty. Students submit time audits to the program three times during the 10 weeks, a practice which allows us to identify and talk with mentors whose students seem to be having trouble. We also correspond with faculty individually and emphasize that Russ Fernald and Katherine Preston are available to talk about the internship anytime.

Outcomes of past programs Interest in HB-REX in 2010 was strong. One-hundred eight preliminary applications were submitted. VPUE funding allowed us to support 31 of these students. Another eight were able to participate through other funding (Federal Work Study, the Humbio Children’s Fund). All faculty who submitted projects were matched with a student, but this was possible only because we could use other funds. Because both student and faculty interest has been so strong, we hope to fund a larger group of students in 2011. Participating students have been extremely enthusiastic about HB-REX. At the end of the summer, we asked interns to complete an anonymous on-line survey, the Undergraduate Research Student Self-Assessment, which was developed by researchers at the University of Colorado specifically for programs such as HB-REX. Twenty-four students responded to the survey. The great majority of responding interns reported “good” or “great” gains in “thinking and working like a scientist.” They reported overwhelmingly “good” to “excellent” relationships with their mentors and research groups. Several students responded that the experience encouraged them to continue research at Stanford and beyond. Some who worked with human subjects or patients were confirmed in their desire to attend medical school. Others wrote that despite a good experience with their mentors and projects, they learned that they did not want to pursue biomedical research as a career. More than three-quarters reported that the experience “confirmed [their] interest in [their] field of study” and “clarified for [them] which field of study [they] want to pursue.” Nearly 80% of respondents said that a stipend was important or very important in allowing them to do research. Based on survey results, we believe that HB-REX is a pivotal experience for many students, helping them to become better scientists and, importantly, to find their interests and think seriously about their careers. The HB-REX program has been a gateway to research for many Human Biology students. Of the 30 seniors currently in our honors program, 16 of them participated in HB-REX in 2009. There are likely to be additional students doing research outside of the Honors program. Several students from the 2010 HB-REX cohort have already discussed the honors program with Katherine Preston, and we look forward to seeing an exceptional set of applications coming from HB-REX students this winter.

APPENDIX List of student projects from 2010

Claire Abraham, The effects of case management and environmental support on obesity reduction, Rebecca Drieling & Randall Stafford, Stanford Prevention Research Center David Havens, The (preventable?) effects of acute stressors on CRF and cortisol in cichlid fish, Russ Fernald, Biology Jacqueline To, Post-transcriptional regulation of GnRH1 transcripts in the African Cichlid fish, Astatotilapia burtoni, Russ Fernald, Biology Kate Morton, Preventing injuries to children that result from agriculture-related recreational activities, Cathy Heaney, Human Biology Katie Nelson, Vaccination challenges in the final stages of polio eradication, Yvonne Maldonado & Stephanie Troy, Pediatric Infectious Diseases Kyla Sherwood, Searching for endozepines: endogenous allosteric modulators of the GABAA receptor, John Huguenard, Neurology Lauren Shih, Validation of downstream microRNA STAT targets in the Drosophila male germline, Margaret Fuller & Allyson Spence, Developmental Biology Mai Nguyen, Comparing image processing applications for hip CT, Garry Gold, Radiology Mariana Barraza, Proyecto Ven, Habla Conmigo!: A community based lab for studying language development, Anne Fernald, Psychology Pauline Santos, Mitochondrial protection may promote differentiation and survival of neuronal precursor cells, Rona Giffard, Anesthesia Quyen Vu, Is Raw Milk Better for Lactose Intolerant People?, Christopher Gardner, Stanford Prevention Research Center Sam Lawrence, Gender differences exist in response to extended antiviral treatment specific to chronic fatigue syndrome, Jose Montoya, Infectious Diseases Catalina Angel, Perception of Pregnant Women in Cali, Colombia Towards the Threat of Congenital Toxoplasmosis, Jose Montoya, Infectious Diseases Sonja Swenson and Stacey Christiansen, How Can We Measure Infants' Efficiency in Processing Spoken Language?, Anne Fernald, Psychology Vanessa Dang, MYC inactivation in renal cancer elicits oncogene addiction associated with apoptosis and senescence, Dean Felsher, Oncology Victoria Bachman, An Optimization of Perceived Intensity Variability During Painful and Non- Painful Stimulation, Sean Mackey, Anesthesiology Anna Greer, Creatine use in competitive athletes and correlations with disordered eating and weight-related behaviors, Rebecka Peebles, Pediatrics, Divn of Adol Med Christina Ospina, Effects of Physical Activity Participation for Adolescent Girls, Jennifer Carlson, Pediatrics Daniel Bui and Tajah Tubbs, My Plates Are Smaller Than Yours: a study in behavioral change for obesity prevention, Donna Matheson, Stanford Prevention Research Center Denise Johnson, Family-Based Intuitive Eating in Obese Adolescents, Rebecka Peebles, Pediatrics, Divn of Adol Med Donald Neal, Mutations in squirrel monkey oxytocin peptide and receptor, Karen Parker, Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences Galym Imanbayev, Combinatorial 3D Hydrogel Matrices for Stem Cell Niche Optimization towards Osteogenesis, Fan Yang, Orthopedic Surgery & Bioengineering Grace Huh and Jennifer Hamilton, Behavioral reactivity in kindergarten children in response to stress, Jelena Obradovic, School of Education Jessica Pih, Multiple sport participation as a predictor of the Female Athlete Triad, Rebecka Peebles & Jennifer Carlson, Pediatrics, Divn of Adol Med Jonathan Tran, Effect of estrogen treatment on cognition and brain growth in mice exposed to chronic sublethal hypoxia, Anna Penn & Wen-Chun Jimmy Lan, Pediatrics, Neonatology Kumi Hodge, Have we been there yet? Encoding spatial memory using pattern completion and separation, Anthony Wagner & Valerie Carr, Stanford Psychology Dept. (Memory Lab) Melissa Luu, Predictors of High Stress Levels in College Students, Rebecka Peebles, Pediatrics, Divn of Adol Med Michelle Berry, Behavioral studies in elephants, Caitlin O’Connell-Rodwell, Otolaryngology/Head & Neck Surgery Mollie Sands, Sleep disturbances in women with terminal metastatic breast cancer, Jamie Zeitzer, Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences Osha Kondori, Ana in Cyberspace: Themes of severity among pro-eating disorder website users , Rebecka Peebles, Pediatrics, Divn of Adol Med Sam Peaslee, Social Stress effects on glucocorticoid receptor expression in prefrontal cortex and hippocampus, David M. Lyons, Behavior Science and Psychiatry Samuel Cohen-Tanugi, Reprogramming fibroblasts to muscle, Helen Blau, Microbiology and Immunology Serena Tanaka, Curiosity and exploratory behavior as a marker of stress inoculation-induced resilience, Karen Parker, Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences Sheila Onyiah, Controlled Release of Biodegradable Polymer/DNA Nanoparticles from 3D Hydrogels for Non-viral Gene Delivery , Fan Yang, Orthopedic Surgery & Bioengineering Tajah Tubbs and Daniel Bui, The effect of healthy or unhealthy classroom toys on children’s food choices, Donna Matheson, Stanford Prevention Research Center Thuy-An Tran, EB3 and its interaction with BPAG1n4 at microtubule tips, Yanmin Yang, Neurology

Budget 45 students at $5600 each = 252,000 Materials (posters - paper and ink) = 260 Picnic = 600 Poster session (3 rooms) = 450 Poster session coffee and pastries = 340 Student travel=1000 Total = 254,650

Institute for Diversity in the Arts and Committee on Black Performing Arts

Departmental Grant for Undergraduate Research: Community Arts Fellowships Program

The Institute for Diversity in the Arts (IDA) is an interdisciplinary program in the humanities that involves students in the study of culture, identity and diversity through artistic expression. Merged as of Fall 2005 with the Committee on Black Performing Arts (CBPA), the Institute for Diversity in the Arts (IDA) and CBPA form a unique interdisciplinary program. (http://diversityarts.stanford.edu).

IDA is also a major course of study within the Center for Comparative Study of Race and Ethnicity (CSRE) and African and African American Studies (AAAS). Titled, Identity, Diversity and Aesthetics, the IDA concentration in CSRE and AAAS is designed to bring the artistic process of inquiry, discovery, and expression into the study of race, culture and identity

The Community Arts Fellowship Program Description:

In partnership with the Haas Center for Public Service, IDA + CBPA has developed a Community Arts Fellowship. Community Arts Fellows will have the opportunity to spend a summer working full-time in the field of community arts in the areas of curating, presenting, and arts education. The summer fellowships provide opportunities for students to work with recognized arts organizations over the summer. The program offers research and internship opportunities for student to gain experience in the field of community-based, non-profit arts organizations. This field-work and direct experience help students gain first hand focus on the topics of their academic research or creative projects. We particularly encourage students majoring in CSRE IDA to apply for CAF, however, students from any major are eligible for a Community Arts Fellowship.

Selection Process and Faculty Mentorship: As part of the partnership with the Haas Ctr. Fellowship Program, Students may apply in February to the Community Arts Fellowship. The application process requires Faculty recommendations, transcripts and a list of applicable course work completed to identify students most appropriate to the CAF opportunity. A faculty staff Selection committee made up of faculty advisors to the IDA and CBPA program select 3-4 students for a fellowship.

Upon selection, Gina Hernandez, Academic Research and Program officer and Executive Director of IDA, works with the students and the faculty selection committee to match fellows with an appropriate academic mentor. Fellows meet with their mentors to develop learning plans, identify the placement appropriate to the topics of research the student is engaged in and assist with preparation for and follow-up on the summer research experience.

Each Community Arts Fellow receives a $4,000 award to support travel and living expenses during the summer. Financial aid is available to students who qualify.

Students are required to meet regularly with their academic mentor in preparation for their summer placements. Students prepare a written learning and research plan that includes additional or directing reading with a faculty member, future course-work and a field notes/qualitative observation methods tutorial. A mid-summer reflection paper and post-fellowship report are also required to update faculty mentors and program staff on the students’ progress and advise on future coursework and material for the students to continue researching the topics that continue to fuel their interests in the field. Finally, a graduate student mentor is provided to each new group of Summer Fellows who’ work most closely matches the areas of interest of the students.

The CAF Program was created in 2006 with funding from the Ford Foundation. In 2009 we also received support for the fellowship program from the Nathan Cummings Foundation. While the funds from outside foundations have help establish the CAF program, we must demonstrate university support to match these awards and to expand and develop placement and research opportunities in the areas of interest of our students.

Since 2007 we have awarded 13 Community Art Fellowships to students in a wide variety of areas of study including Drama/Dance, English, International Relations, Earth Systems, Urban Studies, Art and History in addition to CSRE with the IDA concentration.

Past CAF Students have gone on to graduate-level critical studies, performance studies, MFA programs, as well as into public service, arts administration, and teaching. IDA and CBPA students learn about diverse artistic practices and explore how art can function as a lens for examining the increasingly global questions of race, identity, culture, and community.

Recent examples of successful CAF student placements:

In 2006-07, the first year for CAF Earth Systems major, Katie Yan spent the Summer working at Yerba Buena Center for the Arts in San Francisco. While there, Katie developed programs and materials to support an upcoming exhibition and symposium on biodiversity. Upon returning in Fall of 07-08, Katy presented on the topic in her Earth Systems courses and participated in a student group working on issues of biodiversity. Last summer, (2010) IDA/CSRE major, A-lan Holt spent her fellowship time at the Los Angeles Contemporary Exhibitions. A-lan’s project was to research and assist with an upcoming exhibition, “Los Angeles Goes Live: Exploring a Social History of Performance Art in Southern California, 1970-1983. The exhibit will explore histories and legacies of performance art in Southern California in the 1970s and early 80s, emphasizing the evolution of performance within a broader drive toward experimentation that cut across many spheres of cultural production. This is a topic closely aligned with A-Lan’s research interests and will contribute greatly to the work on her Honor’s thesis project. A-Lan and another of our 2010 Community Arts Fellows will participate in the October SURPS Fair in a couple of weeks.

CAF Program Budget

Student Stipends 3 at $4000/each 12,000 Financial Aid (if applicable up to 1,200/student) 3,600

CAF Spring Quarter Send Off Lunch 200

Total: $15,800

ONLINE SUBMISSION Following information submitted October 2010

I. Contact Info Department – International Relations Chair – Ken Schultz Program Admin – Ipshita SenBasu SRC Faculty Leader – Ken Schultz Research Title – IR Summer Research Program

II. Executive Summary International Relations would like to request funding for our Summer Research Program. The program has been successful for five years, providing opportunities for nearly seventy students to work directly with faculty on their current research projects. This year, we are requesting funding to support 15 students who are expected to work with approximately 12-15 faculty members. The total request is $88,500.

III. Renewal Info See spreadsheet of faculty, projects, and students. The IR Summer Research Program has been quite successful, providing significant research opportunities to nearly 70 students. The students are also able to learn about other research techniques and topics via the weekly seminars held in conjunction with Political Science. At this point, there are no specific changes that will be implemented; however, each year varies depending on the faculty research topics.

IV. Research Program Description While IR is a large undergraduate major, our resources to support students in research activities are slim. The Summer Program is our primary venue to provide students with the opportunity to undertake research projects with faculty. The goal of the IR Summer Research Program is to increase early opportunities for IR majors to engage in research with faculty members and to increase the skills-set of the undergraduates so that they may be better prepared to take on further research. In addition to becoming more familiar with the research process, students will be able to form mentoring relationships with faculty members at an early stage in their academic career. Each faculty member will have 1-2 IR students under his or her direction, and some students may work in research teams. The faculty will be expected to meet with the students at least once per week. Most students will be involved with ongoing or newly developed research projects with Stanford faculty that focus on international relations. Students’ primary activities will include archival research, data gathering and analysis, and assistance in the preparation of academic papers. IR will also hold a twice-weekly seminar series, in conjunction with the Political Science Department Summer Program, at which faculty and students will present and discuss their research projects. This forum exposes students to other research activities taking place during the summer while also encouraging students to engage their peers in discussing their varied research topics.

Ken Schultz, the IR Program Director, will have oversight for the program, and Ipshita Senbasu will provide administrative support for the Summer Research Program. Students will apply to the IR program and list faculty projects that are of interest to them. Faculty will review applications and interview students of interest and then offers will be made.

V. Student Products The exact product depends on the nature of the research project. In most cases, students help compile and document original data sets and contribute to data analysis. They may also assist in the preparation of academic papers. In addition, all research teams will present at the weekly seminars that they prepare and present in cooperation with their faculty supervisor. In most cases, a Powerpoint presentation will be developed to be used in the seminar.

VI. Relation to Students’ Educational Program The Summer Research Program gives students’ direct experience in academic research under the supervision of a faculty member. Students learn about research design, data collection methods, data analysis, and the presentation of academic work. This training can serve as launching point for future independent research, including a senior honors thesis. It is also valuable experience for students who are thinking about going on to graduate school. In addition, the Summer Research Program generates a mentoring relationship as faculty supervisors may become academic and/or honor thesis advisors.

VII. Evaluation In the past, we have relied primarily upon individual feedback from both faculty and students to gauge the success of the program. In addition, we refer to the evaluations submitted via the VPUE

VIII. Budget (funding through Aug. 31, 2011) IR would like to request total funding of $88,500.

Expense Type Amount Notes Student Stipends $84,000 15 Full Time ($5600 each) General Supplies $1500 Food for Seminars/Social $3000 TOTAL $88,500

VPUE Department Grant Application for Undergraduate Research

Contact: Jon Christensen, Executive Director [email protected], 650-759-6534

The Bill Lane Center for the American West supports teaching and research on western land and life in the United States, Canada, and Mexico. Undergraduate research assistants are the lifeblood of much of this research. They enable us to carry out innovative research projects in multidisciplinary teams that range across the humanities, social sciences, sciences, and engineering. Their research with us also enables many of them to develop their own research skills and project, often resulting in honors theses and experiences that shape their careers inside academia and in the larger world.

Our research assistants are treated as collaborators in ongoing faculty research projects that support the core program goals of the Bill Lane Center. Our objective is to offer opportunities for undergraduates that involve faculty and students from multiple disciplines and engage students in the entire process of original research, from research design, literature review, and data collection, to analysis, scholarly writing, production of visual scholarship such as maps and interactive media, and communication of results through peer-review publication, oral presentations, and working with the media. Most importantly, students get experience making original contributions to important research. Undergraduate research assistants become better individual researchers, learning skills that they put to use in their own research projects and theses, as undergraduates, graduate students, and professionals. Research assistants also get valuable professional experience, learning how to work effectively as part of a research group or professional management team.

The Center’s faculty co-directors are David M. Kennedy, Donald J. McLachlan Professor of History, Emeritus, and Richard White, Margaret Byrne Professor of American History. The co-directors are actively involved as mentors in all of the Center’s research. Members of our faculty committee are also involved as mentors in research projects in their fields. Those faculty members are: Scott Bukatman, Associate Professor Art and Art History, Film and Media Studies Program; Albert M. Camarillo. Miriam and Peter Haas Centennial Professor in Public Service, Department of History, Special Assistant to the Provost for Faculty Diversity in charge of the Faculty Development Initiative of the Center for Comparative Studies in Race and Ethnicity; David L. Freyberg Associate Professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering, and, by courtesy, of Geological and Environmental Science; Pamela A. Matson, Chester Naramore Dean of the School of Earth Sciences. Richard and Rhoda Goldman Professor in Environmental Studies,

Professor and Senior Fellow, Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies; Rosamond Naylor, Professor of Environmental Earth System Science and Senior Fellow at the Woods Institute and at the Freeman Spogli Institute, and Professor, by courtesy, of Economics; Ramón Saldívar, Hoagland Family Professor in the School of Humanities and Sciences, and Professor, by courtesy, of Iberian and Latin American Cultures; Gary Segura, Professor of Political Science, Chair of Chicana/o Studies; Matthew Snipp. Professor of Sociology, Director of Center for Comparative Studies in Race and Ethnicity; and Barton H. (Buzz) Thompson, Robert E. Paradise Professor of Natural Resources Law, Perry L. McCarty Director of the Woods Institute for the Environment, Senior Fellow, by courtesy, Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies

Our research at the Center is organized in three areas: 1) the Humanities, 2) Environment, and, 3) Politics and Public Policy. In all of them we involve faculty, graduate students, and undergraduate research assistants, as well as visiting scholars and journalists. The Center’s research assistants work directly with faculty on vital research projects at the heart of our mission. This year, we have the following major research projects underway. Each of them will engage undergraduate research assistants in meaningful research, often with immediate practical implications for policy and problem solving:

1) In the Humanities, we currently have a grant from the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation for a Sawyer Seminar on the “Comparative Wests” of the western United States, Canada, and Australia. The seminar is led by Richard White and Douglas Bird, assistant professor of Anthropology, and involves faculty and graduate students from History, Anthropology, Sociology, and Art History. The seminar examines colonial and postcolonial history, indigenous peoples, the environment, and art. The grant supports faculty and graduate students. We seek VPUE funding to involve an undergraduate research assistant in this emerging field of humanities research. This summer we had an undergraduate research assistant working on developing a catalog of art from these regions that will serve two purposes: first, as a basis for seminar discussions; and 2) as a working prospectus for an art exhibition at the Cantor Center for the Arts. We seek VPUE funding to enable an undergraduate research assistant to continue to work during the academic year and through the summer on developing this project, through research, writing, and identifying art objects that should be included in the seminar’s discussions and could be included in an exhibition.

2) In the Environment field, our “Water in the West Project” is led by David Kennedy and Barton H. “Buzz” Thompson, co-director of the Woods Institute for the Environment, with participation by numerous other faculty members across the humanities, social sciences, sciences, and engineering. We had two undergraduate research assistants working on the project last year and this summer. Their research contributed to developing research agendas for this project, which have since been awarded a grant from the S.D. Bechtel, Jr.

Foundation. The grant covers faculty, staff, and graduate student support for research, but does not include support for undergraduate research. And there are numerous opportunities for undergraduates to engage productively in research in this project, on the history of metropolitan water systems, groundwater management in the West and Australia, comparative water policy in the western United States, management of the Colorado River, and developing metrics and performance measurement systems for sustainable water systems. We will also be conducting a Sophomore College course in 2011 on the Colorado River, so there will be numerous ongoing opportunities to engage undergraduates as research assistants in “Water in the West.” At this stage, we seek VPUE funding to enable three seniors — Emily Turco in Human Biology, Siddhartha Oza in Earth Systems, and Alex Braman in History — to work on this research project during the academic year, as well as funding for three undergraduate research assistants in the summer.

3) Also in the Environment field, the Center is developing an “Uncommon Dialogue on Western Rangelands and Ranching” with the Woods Institute for the Environment, and Biology professor Harold Mooney. This dialogue will bring ranchers, policymakers, scientists, and conservationists together at Stanford in Spring or Summer 2011 to develop a research and policy agenda for recognizing the ecosystem values associated with livestock production on western grasslands and providing incentives for producing better management of these ecosystems. Evie Danforth, a junior in History, and an undergraduate research assistant this summer, worked with the Center and the Woods Institute to research sustainable livestock grazing in the West and develop a proposal for this “Uncommon Dialogue,” which has since been approved with funding for the conference and associated costs, but not for undergraduate research. We seek VPUE funding to enable us to continue to engage Evie Danforth as a research assistant during the academic year and again through the summer.

4) In the field of politics and public policy, the Center’s “California Constitutional Reform Project” is led by David Kennedy, and postdoctoral fellow Mike Binder, who is jointly sponsored by the Public Policy Program, the Hoover Institution, and the Bill Lane Center. Mike Binder is also a teaching assistant for the Public Policy Practicum. We seek VPUE funding to enable an undergraduate research assistant to work on reform policy research in this project during the academic year and through the summer.

In total, we seek funding for 5 undergraduate research assistant positions during the 2010- 2011 academic year and during the summer of 2011.

At the Bill Lane Center, our faculty leaders and participants in these projects act as both scholarly and professional mentors to our research assistants. In past years, four to five

Academic Council faculty members have supervised Center-sponsored research assistants each year, and we expect a similar level of direct involvement this coming year. Research assistants also work directly from time to time with many of the other Academic Council faculty involved in our research collaborations. These research projects are top priorities for faculty mentors and other faculty participants. And our research assistants become true collaborators and essential members of these ongoing, faculty-directed research efforts. Our primary faculty mentors meet with students at least once a week for a report on research progress to date, discussion of research design, and development of tasks. Research assistants also meet with other faculty participants and faculty advisers in these multidisciplinary projects on a regular basis.

Across the range of projects, we have common expectations for research contributions and products. At the beginning of each research assistantship, faculty mentors provide students with an in-depth orientation to the research project, questions, and plan. Students use library and other resources —archives, electronic databases, other collections materials — to gather sources and data. They produce several short memoranda or other work products over the course of each quarter, culminating in a measurable, well-defined contribution to the overall research effort. In some cases, that is a paper written by an undergraduate research assistant as lead author with other members of the team as co- authors for submission to a peer-review journal. Other times it is a discrete element of a larger collaborative product, such as an annotated bibliography, an annotated database, graphical representations and interpretation of statistical results, or static and interactive maps. We ask our research assistants to present their work to the rest of the team on a regular basis and to do a final presentation of their work to faculty and students from all of our projects. We also encourage our research assistants to attend Center-sponsored events and provide opportunities to meet and interact with other faculty, visiting scholars, graduate students, and professionals.

Faculty mentors informally evaluate student progress during weekly meetings. Feedback on written assignments provides students with an assessment of their progress and contributions to the project. In addition to these evaluations, the Center asks each faculty member to write a short review of the student’s work after one academic quarter. Faculty are asked to reevaluate students and submit a report at the end of each academic year and summer. At the end of the academic year and summer, we also require students to prepare a report on their research, including an evaluation of their experience.

Our research assistants share two large rooms with outside windows at the Bill Lane Center in the new Jerry Yang and Akiko Yamazaki Environment and Energy Building. Our Financial and Human Resources Manager, Laura Ma, provides administrative support for students during their research assistantships, and our Program and Research Associate, Heather West, coordinates evaluation of the program, including collecting student and faculty evaluations of progress and performance.

The Center carefully reviews student and faculty reports on our research assistant program. We ask students to fill out an evaluation form for the Center, which our staff uses to evaluate the quality of the individual research assistant experience and the structure of our program. Over the past few years, we have made a few minor changes to our program — such as scheduling more frequent meetings gathering together all of our research assistants to share their work, methods, questions, and findings — but overall, we have found that our focus on providing a concentrated, in-depth, individually designed research experience in close collaboration with a faculty member has been most rewarding for students. This way they make the research projects their own.

Our research assistants have gone on to write honors theses, apply successfully to graduate school, garner fellowships in academia, and get jobs in fields directly related to the research that they have done with us. They have also come back to work with us again and again. During summer 2007, five undergraduate research assistants worked on Lane Center projects, three funded by a VPUE grant. Three of these students continued on with same research team during the 2007-08 academic year. This past year, we had four students continuing to work with us. And this year we have two students continuing to work with us, in addition to new students who have joined our research teams. One of the major goals of our work with undergraduate research assistants is to involve students in research for as long as their interest and availability allows and the research continues to make a valuable contribution to their educational experience at Stanford. So we have been very pleased that we have a good track record for engaging undergraduate research assistants over substantial periods of time. This gives the students real research experience, and it gives us undergraduate research assistants who make meaningful, measurable contributions to important research.

Because we have such good success with retaining undergraduate research assistants, and we have developed a reputation for providing substantial, interesting research opportunities, we now have more qualified applicants on file than we do open positions, and we continue to get new students inquiring about research opportunities at the Center. However, should we need to advertise a position, we advertise position descriptions, which clearly specify qualifications and performance expectations, through departmental mailings lists, student networks, the Bill Lane Center web site, the Career Development Center, and The Stanford Daily. Students are selected directly by the faculty mentors leading each research project.

Budget

Academic Year RAs (6) $25,200 10hrs/week, 10 weeks/quarter, 3 quarters Summer RAs (6) $33,600 40hrs/week, 10 weeks TOTAL $58,800

Department of Linguistics 2010-11 VPUE Departmental Grant for Undergraduate Research

Research Program Goals: For 2010-11, the Department of Linguistics is requesting a total of $32,150, i.e., funding for five full-time 10-week summer internships. The program will provide opportunities for undergraduates to collaborate closely with faculty on faculty-led research. The Undergraduate Advisors will solicit faculty participation in the program. Undergraduates will apply directly to the Undergraduate Advisors, Arto Anttila and Kathryn Potts, providing information about their preferred project(s), backgrounds and qualifications. The Undergraduate Advisors will work with the faculty and the Student Services Officer, Alyssa Ferree, to match applicants with projects. The program is intended for sophomores and juniors, preferably Linguistics majors; students from other majors will be considered if openings are available. To be selected, a student must be in good academic standing and have course background and skills relevant for the internship.

Research Program Structure and Organization: Regular meetings of faculty mentors with their interns will be supplemented by biweekly lunches for all interns and faculty mentors devoted to developing and exchanging research ideas.

Plan for faculty and administrative oversight of the program: Faculty investigators will meet regularly with their research interns, guiding them through the methodologies required for the project, intervening and suggesting alternative approaches if problems arise. The department finance administrator and Student Services Officer will track and oversee internship expenditures, and advise faculty and interns of University procedures and regulations relating to research expenses.

Description of the research or scholarly activities in which students will be engaged: The projects offered will be from a variety of linguistic areas, representing the diverse research interests of the Linguistics Department; past research topics included African American Vernacular English, computational linguistics, language acquisition, syntax, phonetics, and sociolinguistics.

Procedures and requirements for recruitment of students and faculty: The Undergraduate Advisors will solicit faculty participation in the summer undergraduate research internship program. Undergraduates will apply directly to the Undergraduate Advisors, Arto Anttila and Kathryn Potts, who will work with faculty and the Student Services Officer, Alyssa Ferree, to match applicants with projects.

Student Product: Interns will be asked to summarize the work done, highlighting any research results, conclusions, and questions for further research, at an informal Department symposium in the subsequent autumn quarter. Although not a required component of the internship program, it is worth noting that many of our past intern researchers have gone on to present their research results at academic conferences.

Plan for Program Evaluation: Intern and faculty participants will regularly present findings at the bi-weekly lunch gatherings. They will also be asked to submit a brief written progress report and any comments about their participation to date at the program’s midway point and at its conclusion. The Undergraduate Advisors will review these and address any concerns that may arise.

Proposed Budget: Stipends for five students at $5600 each: $28,000 Research materials for five students at $500 each: $2500 Five biweekly research meetings/lunches at $120 each: $600 Graduate Student Mentor, 30 hours at $35/hour: $1050 Total: $32,150 VPUE Departmental Grants for Undergraduate Research

Mathematics Department Program Proposal and Budget

Over the last several years, the mathematics department has had VPUE funds to support up to six undergraduates doing research with Stanford Math Faculty. (In 2009 VPUE only funded five. A sixth student was supported by the department.)

We have found this program to be quite successful. The summer projects have given students a taste of research. Sometimes these projects have resulted in publishable work. Even when this is not the case the collaboration has often or usually been a rewarding one for both the student and the faculty mentor.

We send solicitations for projects around February 1. The draft solicitation is sent to all undergraduate math majors and to the math faculty. The student must find an advisor who will be on campus during the summer and is willing to supervise a project.

The proposal is due at the end of February. It is a one-page pdf file describing the project which is reviewed by a committee. It is understood that the student and advisor both commit to meet regularly during the summer, and that the parameters of the project will be as described in the proposal.

The committee will consist of Professors Daniel Bump, Gunnar Carlsson, Brian Conrad and Ravi Vakil. Bump will chair the committee.

The selection of the awardees is made on the basis of the proposals and also of a review of the student's academic record. Awards are announced before Spring break.

Budget: Student Stipends to fund 6 students at $5,600 each ($14/hour, 40 hours/week, for 10 weeks) Total for Student Stipends: $33, 600

The Martin Luther King, Jr., Research and Education Institute VPUE Departmental Grant for Undergraduate Study & Research Request for Funding for September 2010 - August 2011

• Program Objective The Martin Luther King, Jr., Papers Project, under the auspices of the Martin Luther King, Jr., Research and Education Institute, offers Stanford students opportunities to develop skills in historical and social science research about Martin Luther King, Jr. and the movements he inspired. Working closely with Prof. Clayborne Carson and the Institute’s editorial staff, students directly contribute to the publication of a definitive fourteen-volume, annotated edition of The Papers of Martin Luther King, Jr., and to related online educational activities providing documentary information and materials for K-12 teachers and students.

• Student Activities Since the Project’s inception in 1985, the King Research Fellows Program has engaged undergraduate and graduate students in every stage of the King Project’s work. Students assist the editorial staff to acquire documents from archives and then to participate in the document-based research and writing that are at the core of the editorial process for The Papers. Students are trained in library, internet and database research. The program includes opportunities for part-time research internships during the academic year, full-time summer internships, directed research projects, support for honors theses, and frequent opportunities for students to participate in Institute-sponsored lectures, research-related field trips, seminars, and forums.

• Mentoring Strategies The Project’s senior editorial staff trains students in the use of primary documents in historical research and writing. The diverse interests of student researchers challenge us to design research opportunities to fit the needs of undergraduates in a variety of disciplines. Students consult with staff to determine their individual goals. This collaboration allows students to maximize their research experience, while group activities and seminars featuring guest speakers as well as luncheon discussions with the director and field trips encourage group discussion and team building. Students regularly provide positive feedback regarding the availability of staff to answer questions and guide research. As a result of the working relationships that develop at the Institute, students often request letters of recommendation and references; many maintain contact with staff after leaving the Institute.

• Student Products Depending upon students' skills and interests and the Project's overall objectives, a student may engage in a wide range of research, including but not limited to document annotations, document and audio transcriptions, biographies, detailed event chronologies, and the acquisition of documents. The research tasks completed by student researchers often contribute directly to the publication of the King Papers and to the development of the Institute’s online educational resources.

• Project Evaluation In addition to ongoing informal dialogue with students regarding their satisfaction with the program, the King Institute has developed a quarterly formal evaluation. Students evaluate themselves and the program, while staff, who worked directly with students, evaluates each student's progress in research skill development. The project director and research staff review completed evaluations to ensure students are continuing on an increasingly challenging research path and use these evaluations as a measure of the program’s effectiveness. Evaluations enable staff to modify students' research experiences to ensure that students continue to develop new research skills.

• Summary of Outcomes: Two of our past researchers have become Rhodes Scholars, at least a dozen have completed advanced degrees in history, several are now college professors, and three became members of the King Papers staff. Using the skills they obtained from the Institute and our available resources, students have published honors essays that have won University awards, and a few have won grants from major funding institutions, such as the Andrew G. Mellon Foundation.

Proposed Research Program Description

Research Program Goals: The Martin Luther King, Jr., Research and Education Institute under the direction of Stanford history professor Clayborne Carson offers Stanford students opportunities to develop historical research and writing skills by involving them in faculty-led scholarship regarding the life and work of Martin Luther King, Jr. Although the King Research Fellows program is open to students from all disciplines, its central goal is to encourage students interested in history and the social sciences to pursue careers in teaching and scholarship, and to broaden their awareness of career opportunities in the field of history and education.

Research Program Structure and Organization: During the past twenty-five years, more than two hundred students have participated in the King Research Fellows program by contributing to various ongoing research and educational efforts, most notably, The Papers of Martin Luther King. The King Papers Project provides students with an unparalleled opportunity to contribute to scholarly research and documentary editing. Carson provides overall direction for its programs and supervises administrative and professional staff. The staff assists Carson in providing day-to-day supervision of the student researchers. This organizational structure ensures that students are well trained, given clear direction regarding their research tasks, and provided with feedback regarding their performance. Student research assignments are challenging and varied, reflecting the fact that many students have the opportunity to work on volumes of the King Papers during all stages of the publication process, as well as web-related and educational projects. Due to the Institute’s long-term initiative, students typically remain involved in the Fellows program for more than one quarter, with some participating in the program throughout their career at Stanford, enabling the development of strong research skills and professional behaviors.

Plan for faculty and administrative oversight of the program: Our goal at the King Papers Project is to provide students with advanced research skills comparable to that of a first-year graduate student in history. Student research activities are closely monitored by the Institute’s director and its staff. The Project’s entire research work plan has been refined to ensure that students make substantial contributions to scholarly publications and educational products. Each student is mentored by the associate editor throughout the duration of their time with the Institute. Together, they design a skills development plan at the beginning of each academic quarter. These meetings enable the mentor to arrange research opportunities and skills development based on the talents and interests expressed by the individual student. Development plans are reviewed at least quarterly, and updated according to each student’s increasing skill level and changing research interests. One student described her work here as “real research- not clerical work, as what sometimes occurs in these positions.” Another described her experience saying, “research is not always easy, therefore, my job as a research assistant has encouraged critical thinking because many times taking data at face value is ineffective.”

Description of the research or scholarly activities in which students will be engaged: Students participate in every aspect of the Project’s effort to publish the definitive edition of King’s most significant correspondence, sermons, speeches, published writings, and unpublished manuscripts. The King Fellowship is designed to familiarize undergraduates with the methods of documentary editing by examining King’s primary documents as well as documents related to the broader African American freedom struggle. Training focuses on instruction in the use of primary documents in historical research and writing, and the skills and knowledge needed to effectively use them as a primary resource. After receiving basic training, interns refine their abilities to accurately conjecture historical contexts (range dating, thematic content, probable authorship, etc.) from minimal content. This type of research requires advanced attention to detail and an exceptional ability to conjecture the context of the documents based on minimal content cues, and requires guided and independent research. Intermediate students often assist with reconstructing King’s daily activities by undertaking extensive newspaper and manuscript research. Progression to this task reflects the student's ability to work independently since much of this kind of research is done in a library using microfilm and special collections. Through this task students develop a greater understanding of broader local, national, and international context of the African American freedom struggle, as well as developing archival etiquette and professional communication with other institutions and individuals. Advanced students take part in focused research of an extended nature, such as that required to write the annotations and introductory essays included in the published volumes. Exposure to this task enables students to understand the purpose of annotation in documentary history, to discriminate between reliable and unreliable resources, and hone their research and writing skills. Advanced students also assist with acquiring new primary documents from archives and individuals around the country. Depending upon the phase of the manuscript, some students get experience working in the final stages of manuscript preparation. At this phase, Stanford students work directly with the associate editor to edit, revise, and fact check document annotations and the introductory essay to ensure our work meets the highest publishing standards. Past students, who have had the opportunity to work during the final stages of manuscript preparation, have said the experience is invaluable because they learn firsthand the rigors involved in academic publishing. This collaborative effort between staff and students culminates in the publication of The Papers of Martin Luther King, Jr. Each student is acknowledged for their contributions to preserving the historical legacy of Dr. King in our volumes and other publications.

In January 2008 the King Institute with the assistance of Stanford students published the Martin Luther King, Jr., Encyclopedia, a version of which is featured on our website. The King Encyclopedia has become an essential reference resource for students and scholars interested in the larger Civil Rights Movement. In the coming year, the Institute’s goal is to enhance our readers’ experience with the encyclopedia by adding more articles and providing hyperlinks from existing articles to relevant primary document texts, photographs, and audio recordings. As with the book publication, students will research, write, and edit essays for the online King Encyclopedia, while increasing their knowledge of the African American freedom struggle. Students with web development skills will assist staff in acquiring interesting and historically significant documents and audio/visual materials, as well as in developing a more interactive interface for our users. Through the work of the King Institute, Stanford students will be contributing to a body of data relating to the civil rights movement not previously available to scholars in the field, thereby impacting the scholarly discourse on many levels.

The Institute offers many group activities, including frequent guest speakers such as Bettina Aptheker, historian and free speech movement leader; SCLC’s Educational Director Dorothy Cotton, the Institute Scholar-in-Residence, Clarence Jones, lawyer, speech writer, and friend of Dr. King; and Michele Elam, Stanford University Professor of English and Interim Director of African & African American Studies. Students consistently rank the seminars as highlights of their experience at the Institute. One student wrote: “I thoroughly enjoyed the seminars and definitely believe they should continue for the following years.” The seminars give “us a time to voice our views on the movement while tackling some of its still- thorny contradictions.” Lunches with the director and occasional field trips to sites related to the Institute’s research are also a part of the King Institute experience. Two summers ago, two students traveled with Carson to some of the significant sites of the Civil Rights Movement, including Selma, Alabama; Memphis, Tennessee; and Little Rock, Arkansas. The students participated in workshops designed to give fuller context to events that occurred at each of the sites they visited. In addition, students were given the rare opportunity to meet many of the major participants in the Selma, Memphis, and Little Rock campaigns.

Procedures and requirements for recruitment of students and faculty: The project encourages Stanford University undergraduates from any discipline and at all stages in their career to apply to the academic-year research program and summer internship. The application process includes several short answers to assess the student’s present skill set and an essay question that asks students to explain their goals and expectations of the project, and culminates with an interview. Students primarily learn about research opportunities through informational sessions for new and returning students in September of each year, and through the director’s yearly undergraduate course on the African American freedom struggle. Students interested in undertaking a paid internship at the Institute are also encouraged to enroll in a one unit course, “Martin Luther King in His Own Words: Discovering Primary Documents.” Our program also receives much appreciated publicity from other campus organizations and departments, including the History department, the African and African American Studies program, the Center of Comparative Studies in Race and Ethnicity, and the Black Community Services Center. Staff and students working at the Institute regularly participate in Admit Week programs, and events with other campus organizations to further promote our work.

Student Product: Students leave the King Institute with a variety of skills useful to their independent research interest and scholarly and professional development. Acquired skills include but are not limited to: greater understanding of historical research methods, extensive knowledge of the Civil Rights Movement, understanding the use and organization of historical archives and research libraries, ability to create and record business correspondence, the use of good judgment and professionalism when interacting with the public, and digital editing techniques. One student’s work over the course of last year is particularly noteworthy. MacKenzie Tudor, a Stanford junior, worked with Professor Carson to create film clips for his history courses and for the King Institute website. Tudor combined film and audio recordings of oral histories with photographs and primary source documents to create short documentaries. In the process, Tudor acquired historical research skills and film editing techniques.

Two of our past summer researchers have become Rhodes Scholars, at least a dozen have completed advanced degrees in history, several are now college professors, and three went on to become members of the King Institute’s staff. Using the Institute’s resources, other students have published honors essays that have won University awards. David Lai, a former Stanford student researcher and member of the King Institute staff, wrote his honor’s thesis on Martin Luther King, Jr.’s theology, which was based largely on his work on Volume 6 of The Papers. Lai won the David M. Potter Award for Excellence in Undergraduate Honors Research and the Golden Medal. He is now a first-year graduate student in the History Department at the University of Kentucky. In addition to the educational value of the work at the King Papers Project, students have often expressed an interest in education and a strong commitment to social justice issues, as evidenced by the careers they have pursued after graduation. For example, former interns are currently working for AmeriCorps, Teach for America, public radio, and the Southern Poverty Law Center.

Plan for Program Evaluation: Student researchers are evaluated every quarter. The student evaluation includes a self-evaluation and an evaluation by all staff and faculty members who worked directly with the student. The project director reads all completed evaluations to ensure students are continuing on an increasingly challenging research path and accomplishing project goals. The project director also uses the quarterly evaluations as a measure of feedback on the King Fellows program’s effectiveness. Evaluations enable Institute staff to modify research paths and project work plans so that students continue to gain worthwhile experiences.

The Martin Luther King, Jr., Research and Education Institute

VPUE Grant for Undergraduate Study & Research Request for Funding for September 2010 - August 2011

Fall 20109 - Spring 2011 academic year 10 undergraduate student researchers @ $13.00/hr x 10 hrs/wk x 27 wks Hourly Stipends 35,100

2011 Summer 3 Stanford interns Stipends @ $14.00/hr x 40 hrs/wk x 8 wks 13,440 Field trips to Bay Area archives/historical sites 600 14,040

Total funding rquested:$ 49,140

C:\Documents and Settings\jabbott\My Documents\KPP\ADMIN\Grants & Contracts\VPUE\VPUE proposal 10.10\Budget 10.10.xlsBudget 10.10.xlsProposal 9.10-8.11 10/13/2010 Appendix A

The Martin Luther King, Jr., Research and Education Institute

VPUE Grant #0296: Undergraduate Study & Research Recap of Expenses September 2009 - August 2010

Funding received $ 39,200

Expenses

Fall 2009 Hourly Stipends (8 students) 3,504

Winter 2010 Hourly Stipends (9 students) 3,273

Spring 2010 Hourly Stipends (11 students) 3,692

Summer 2010 Hourly Stipends (1 student) 346

Total expenditures $ 10,815

Un-expended balance:$ 28,385

C:\Documents and Settings\jabbott\My Documents\KPP\ADMIN\Grants & Contracts\VPUE\VPUE proposal 10.10\Budget 10.10.xlsBudget 10.10.xlsrecap Sep 09 - Aug 10 10/13/2010 Appendix B

The Martin Luther King, Jr. Research and Education Institute

VPUE Departmental Grant for Undergraduate Study & Research List of Participants September 2009 - August 2010

Faculty: Clayborne Carson Professor of History Director and Senior Editor, King Papers Project

King Institute Staff: Tenisha Armstrong, Associate Director/Editor Susan Englander, Associate Director/Editor Ashni Mohnot, Director of Education, Liberation Curriculum Stacey Zwald, Research Assistant Alex Marquand-Willse, Research Assistant David Lai, Research Assistant Josh Kunz, Archival Assistant

Stanford undergraduates:

Victoria Asbury Ty McCormick Shira Shane Shara Esbenshade Matthew Miller Andrea Sy Michael Huggins Jenna Queenan Trinity Thompson Alexandra Hunter Brianna Pang Mackenzie Tudor Jessica Knight Katrice Williams Appendix C

The Martin Luther King, Jr., Research and Education Institute VPUE Departmental Grants

Stanford undergraduate participants through August 31, 2010

David Agu Michael Huggins Brianna Pang Sarah Allen Alexandra Hunter Jill Parker Brandis Anderson Kyonne Isaac Juliana Partridge Kristy Anwuri Margot Isman Celia Perry Ilya Arbatman Aaron Jackson Jed Peterson Victoria Asbury Louis Jackson Cursha Pierce Amna Aziz Sharada Jumbulapati Olivia Puerta Che Banjoko Nasser Khan Weena Pun Kaara Baptiste Monique King Jenna Queenan Alicia Barber Jessica Knight Krystal Quinlan Gina Bateson Eric Kramon Gilbert Ramirez Rob Boyle Theresa Johnson Ashley Rayner Lisa Brown David Lai Anneliese Rice Lonnie Browne Vanessa Lawrence Alicia Robinson Tracie Bryant Zoe Levitt Jason Robinson Jessie Carr Ahmad Lewis Alison Root Hector Chang Michael Lewis Mercedes Roy Jennifer Clark Marina Lieban Meghana Reddy Warren Colbert Shirley Lin Lisa Ruskin Antonio Colvin James Locus Anna Sale Tambi Cork Katrina Logan Katie Salisbury Mathew Cowan Jack Loveridge Andrew Schneider Brannon Cullum Betty Luan Tiana Seymore LaTasha Crow Christy Machida Shira Shane Michael Cruz Fahad Mahmood Kate Skolnick Brian DeChesare Dagem Mammo Lindsey Smith Michael Demmitt Sarah Mangin Christopher Stallworth Noor Desai Kahdeidra Martin Kate Stanley Robert DeSpain Lauren Mathews Ari Steinberg Tabari Dossett James McClean Andrea Sy Georgia Duan Ty McCormick Manon Terrell Kevin Dumolga Lauren McCoy Brandi Thompson Eron (Cynthia) Eguavoen Marina McCoy Trinity Thompson Karis Eklund Alice McNeill Ellie Titus Averi Epps Maria Medina Mackenzie Tudor Donovan Ervin Matthew Miller Seraphina Uluoong Shana Esbenshade Monica Miller Chris Vaughan Kristin Ferrales Andrew Mo Clara Webb Tim Fleming Marie-Jo Mont-Reynaud Christopher Williams Crystal Garland Tamandra Morgan Katrice Williams Jordan Gilchrist Kelsey Moss Miya Woolfalk Adia Gooden Rosemary Ndubuizu Juliana Yanez Rance Graham-Bailey Laura Nugent Teresa Yeager Austin Henderson Chika Okafor Reid Yokoyama Vivian Ho Sekhar Paladugu Allen Yu Adrianna Hernandez-Stewart Jacqueline Palma Jingni Zhao

STANFORD UNIVERSITY CENTER on PHILANTHROPY and CIVIL SOCIETY

Vice Provost October 13th for Undergraduate Education 2010

Undergraduate Student Research Fellows Funding Proposal

Proposal Submitted on behalf of: Kim Meredith, Executive Director, Stanford Center on Philanthropy and Civil Society

[email protected] 650.723.7259 office 650.333-8310 cell

Stanford Center on Philanthropy and Civil Society Undergraduate Student Research Fellows Funding Proposal October 13, 2010

October 12, 2010

Brian Thomas Associate Dean, Undergraduate Research Opportunities 119 Sweet Hall Stanford, CA 94305

Dear Brian Thomas,

Please accept this proposal for a renewal grant and increase from $11,200 to $15,000 to fund the Undergraduate Research Fellows Program in the Stanford University Center on Philanthropy and Civil Society (PACS). Research is the core mission of PACS and we have worked with over 20 academic departments.

PACS research is examining philanthropy’s evolving role and the potential for increased impact, particularly during these challenging economic times. Governments are stretched, corporations have a “trust deficit” and nonprofits must work smarter to provide more services with scarcer funds and resources.

How do philanthropic individuals, foundations, nonprofits, and other elements of civil society collaborate through research to effectively advance the public good through strategic government? What relationships exist among foundations, nonprofits and voluntary activity in realizing collective goals? These are the types of questions we hope to explore through PACS research.

The Stanford Center on Philanthropy and Civil Society (PACS) is a program of The Institute for Research in the Social Sciences (IRiSS) within the School of Humanities and Sciences and is currently housed at the Freeman Spogli Institute in Encina Hall. This structure provides the opportunity for multi-disciplinary research and collaborations exploring the issues of using private resources to impact or solve public problems.

PACS’ mission is to engage students, faculty and practitioners to examine ways in which philanthropic institutions, nonprofit organizations, and other key elements of civil society work to define and address public interests, both in the United States and globally.

The PACS Center has established the following objectives:

• Increase and enhance the study of philanthropy and civil society by analyzing nonprofit and philanthropic activities through scholarly research. • Prepare future nonprofit leaders, practitioners, and philanthropists for an increasingly interdependent and collaborative environment.

• Connect researchers with practitioners to effect social change. • Promote knowledge sharing, knowledge dissemination, and community building through our recently acquired publication Stanford Social Innovation Review, and our Public Seminar Series.

How have we been advancing this agenda?

• PACS offers PhD fellowships, undergraduate research fellowships, financial support for undergraduates writing honors theses, and support for PhD seminars and workshops. • PACS has three distinguished Faculty Co-Directors who regularly teach, speak and publish in their areas of expertise, while additionally facilitating a research workshop each year. They are advancing our mission and objectives through their leading edge research: Debra Meyerson-Private Initiative for Public Education; Woody Powell-Accounting for Virtue; and Rob Reich-Ethics, Public Policy and Philanthropy. • PACS sponsors the monthly “PACS Seminar Series” that includes speakers who are well-known foundation, nonprofit or academic experts and leaders. • PACS recently acquired the Stanford Social Innovation Review, which will work as a partner to bring forward the best cross-sector ideas, practices and research that will support social change leaders in their work.

In this proposal, you will find information about our undergraduate student research fellowship program. I would be delighted to speak with you further about any questions or concerns.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Sincerely,

Kim Meredith

Kim Meredith Executive Director

Summary

The Stanford University Center on Philanthropy and Civil Society (PACS) requests an increase from $11,200 to $15,000 for a renewal grant from Undergraduate Program Enhancement Grants program. We want to create an opportunity for 6-8 students to partner with professors and visiting scholars who are conducting research on philanthropy and civil society. The students may come from any program within the School of Humanities and Sciences or the School of Engineering. Research positions will be offered to PACSS core faculty and affiliated scholars. Last year, we received $11,200 to fund three students, but due to the late distribution we reallocated our resources and funded 8 students on smaller projects throughout winter, spring and summer quarters. We believe with an increase in funds to $15,000 we will have the capacity to support 8-10 students and their research with Faculty and Visiting Scholars.

In recruiting student fellows and faculty mentors from different fields, PACS will create a multi- disciplinary undergraduate research team that will have the opportunity to meet weekly-to-monthly depending on their research with PACS Doctoral Fellows, PACS Faculty and Visiting Scholars to discuss progress in their research and potential relationships between research projects. Our PACS PhD Fellows and Executive Director as well as our faculty will provide mentorship to the undergraduates. Undergraduate student fellows will gain skills and cross sector knowledge as it relates to philanthropy, civil society and social innovation. We believe that this cross disciplinary approach will foster the development of our students into responsible scholars and leaders of the next generation.

The Goal of the Undergraduate Fellows Program

The goal behind the PACS Undergraduate Fellowship Program is to expose undergraduate students to the academic study of philanthropy and civil society by increasing scholarly research in this field of interest. PACS recognizes that synergies, new discoveries and innovations emerge when scholars from various fields come together to examine social problems through an interdisciplinary lens. Our goal is to expose future scholars and leaders to groundbreaking and collaborative research to educate and engage them in academic communities that are concerned with the betterment of civil society. PACS mission is aligned with the mission of Stanford University’s priority to promote scholarship and research and to promote social good.

Eligible Students

The PACS Undergraduate Research Fellowships are aimed at any student in the School of Humanities and Sciences, or in the School of Engineering. The goal of the research fellowship is to involve undergraduate students from all disciplines in scholarly research that is related to philanthropy and civil society. This interdisciplinary approach aligns with Stanford University’s mission to create future leaders, innovators and scholars in diverse areas of study.

The student fellows will engage in a variety of research activities with the faculty fellows, including design of a project, background literature reviews, data collection, data analysis, and writing the results for scholarly audiences. The nature of the activities will vary according to the nature of the study and the preferences of the faculty mentor.

Stanford Center on Philanthropy and Civil Society Undergraduate Student Research Fellows Funding Proposal October 13, 2010 Through scholarly exposure to the field of philanthropy to promote a robust civil society, fellows will gain critical research skills and knowledge about how to conduct a literature review, collect and organize data, analyze data and reach logical conclusions. The internship will also introduce the students to the field of philanthropy, which may create long-lasting relationships between the students and the community, and may influence their career path and inspire future research. Moreover, the fellowship helps to support an undergraduate to be financially sustainable here at Stanford University.

Mentoring Faculty

PACS will select one faculty mentor or visiting scholar to work with each of our fellows. PACS Faculty Co- Directors will be given top priority in working with fellows. However, other faculty members are welcome to submit academic projects concerning philanthropy and civil society. Faculty research interests are broad and range from the ways in which the nonprofit sector interfaces with government and business to the role of philanthropic organizations as intermediaries in fostering social change within educational institutions. See Appendix A for PACS affiliated faculty and a more complete listing of their research interests and for a full list of affiliated faculty see visit our website at http://pacscenter.stanford.edu/people.

Timeline

Once funding is confirmed, the PACS Program Manager will contact past and prospective faculty mentors to solidify research projects that require a student research fellow. The PACS Executive Director will meet with faculty mentors to ensure: 1) that the project aligns with the mission of PACS to promote scholarly research 2) that the project offers a valuable learning experience for the student 3) that the faculty mentor agrees to regular meetings with the student and will attend one PACS undergraduate fellows meeting each quarter. Once confirmed, the faculty mentors will submit a student assistant request form in which they will outline the skills required for the position. Students will then apply for the opportunity to work as a research fellow and we will select the most appropriate candidates. We anticipate fellows to begin research with their faculty mentors at the beginning of winter quarter. This work will continue throughout the spring quarter and (depending on funding and progress) will potentially extend into the summer.

Budget

The PACS Center is asking for a renewal grant of $15,000. Funding will cover the research stipends for the student fellows as well as the cost of copy, printing and recruiting materials. PACS recognizes that many budgets across the university have been cut. However, we ask that the VPUE office recognize the contribution and growth trajectory of PACS over the past year under new Executive Director leadership.

1) Supporting research • Includes faculty co-director support, research assistantships, fellowships, small grants 2) Educating future leaders and scholars • Includes courses on philanthropy and civil society, research workshops, teach assistants 3) Fostering dialogue • Includes workshop gatherings, seminar series, salon series, conferences

Stanford Center on Philanthropy and Civil Society Undergraduate Student Research Fellows Funding Proposal October 13, 2010

4) Organizational capacity • Includes staff support, website, office expenses, academic advisory board, advisory board and the new SSIR team

Your grant will support the development of more scholarly students, contributions to research and cross-curricular advancement within the university community.

Enduring Knowledge and Relationships

PACS has established its presence in the area of graduate student research. PACS and SSIR are the University’s preeminent place for scholarly research to analyze and inform the nonprofit and philanthropic sectors. Additionally, PACS wants to engage undergraduate students in multi-disciplinary research in the field of philanthropy, social innovation and civil society.

The Undergraduate Student Research Fellowship will engage undergraduates from the research perspective and this program will act as a pipeline for rising scholars in their fields. To further engage the students in the study and incorporation of philanthropy and civil society, the team of student fellows will meet once a month with a faculty research and PACS representative to discuss progress, questions, and ground-breaking research in their fields as it relates to philanthropy and civil society. Students will also be encouraged to attend public lectures, events and workshops hosted by PACS, which feature speakers who are well-known foundation, nonprofit or academic experts and leaders. In this way, faculty, staff and visiting scholars will serve as advisors to help strengthen student links to philanthropic practice, knowledge creation and knowledge sharing. We also learn from the undergraduate students who bring new thinking and insights at every step in their personal and academic development.

In addition to gaining knowledge and exposure through research, Stanford University offers several philanthropy-related courses to further engage the fellows in the field. In particular, Rob Reich (Faculty Co-Director) will co-teach a course with Pam Karlan and Jim Steyer during the winter quarter entitled, Justice at Home and Abroad: Civil Rights in the 21st Century. Additionally, Rob Reich will be co-teaching a course with Bruce Sievers (PACS Center 2010-2011 visiting scholar), in the spring quarter entitled, Theories of Civil Society, Philanthropy, and the Nonprofit Sector, student fellows will be encouraged to enroll in both of these courses.

About PACS

The Stanford University Center on Philanthropy and Civil Society was established in September 2006 through a seed grant from the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation and the Office of the President for Stanford University.

The Center’s mission is to engage students, faculty, and practitioners in scholarship and dialogue that examines ways in which philanthropic institutions, nonprofit organizations, and other key elements of civil society work to address public interests both in the United States and globally.

PACS is moving forward with a strategic view for long-term sustainability. During the launch, PACS had a program director and that role has now evolved into an Executive Director position, in addition a full-

Stanford Center on Philanthropy and Civil Society Undergraduate Student Research Fellows Funding Proposal October 13, 2010 time Philanthropy Program manager has been added. Kim Meredith, the first Executive Director started in July 2009 and has received strong endorsement by the Advisory Board that was formed in 2009 and convenes in June and December annually. The Advisory Board is led by Laura Arrillaga-Andreessen and includes Vice Chair Maddy Stein, Susan Ford Dorsey, Laura Fisher, John Goldman, Russ Hall, Leslie Hume, Burt McMurtry, Bill Meehan and Regina Kulik Scully.

Conclusion

Why Stanford? There are some serious questions that need to be addressed to provide evidenced based research to help individual philanthropists, foundations and nonprofits make the most of strategic leadership and strategic philanthropy. Stanford is a world leader in research and innovation; this acquisition creates more opportunities for faculty, scholars, and collaborators to share groundbreaking research and innovative cross-sector practices that are critical to philanthropy, government, business and communities.

Why Now? Governments are stretched, corporations have a “trust deficit.” Nonprofits and philanthropists must work smarter to provide more services with scarcer funds and resources.

Thank you for your consideration of our renewal grant request for increased funds in the amount of $15,000. Please feel free to contact Kim Meredith with any questions.

Stanford Center on Philanthropy and Civil Society Undergraduate Student Research Fellows Funding Proposal October 13, 2010 Appendix A

People Behind the Center

Executive Director, Kim Meredith and Faculty Co-Director, Rob Reich Associate Professor of Political Science and Ethics in Society and affiliated Professor of Education, make a dynamic team that will provide leadership for this project. In collaboration with Faculty Co-Directors Woody Powell and Debra Meyerson, the team’s focus rests on the creation of new scholars and leaders from every discipline in the philanthropic community.

• Kim Meredith, Executive Director

PACS’ Executive Director, Kim Meredith was an undergraduate student at Stanford and attributes much of her success to her undergraduate experience and opportunities. Meredith joined PACS in July, 2009 and brings a strong commitment to mentoring leaders in philanthropy and civil society for the next generation, while promoting scholarly research.

• Rob Reich, Faculty Co-Director

Rob Reich is an Associate Professor of Political Science, and, by courtesy, of Education at Stanford University. He is a leading faculty member for the Program on Ethics and Society. His research primarily focuses on contemporary political theory, ethics, philanthropy, and public policy. Reich has been active with undergraduate students. He has won the Walter J. Gores Award, Stanford’s highest honor for teaching and has worked at summer institutes with the Sophomore College.

Research Interests: . Civic education . Educational theory and policy . Public service and policy . Contemporary political theory . Liberalism . Moral and legal status of children

• Debra Meyerson, Faculty Co-Director

Debra Meyerson is an Associate Professor of Education. She is also a faculty affiliate of the Center for the Comparative Studies in Race and Ethnicity, the Clayman Institute for Research on Gender, the Public Policy Program, and the Center for Social Innovation. Meyerson was a co- founder of the Stanford Center on Philanthropy and Civil Society and is the founder of the Policy, Organization, and Leadership Studies Program within the School of Education. Among other types, Meyerson has performed research that focuses on philanthropy, educational reform, and grass-roots change processes aimed at eradicating gender and racial inequities in the workplace.

Stanford Center on Philanthropy and Civil Society Undergraduate Student Research Fellows Funding Proposal October 13, 2010 Research Interests: . The role of philanthropic organizations as intermediaries in fostering change within educational institutions . Leadership and entrepreneurship in education . Going to scale in the charter school field . Accessibility and the construction (and destruction) of work-life boundaries through communication technologies . Gender and race relations in organizations, specifically individual and organizational strategies of change aimed at removing inequities and fostering productive inter-group relations

• Walter W. Powell, Faculty Co-Director

Woody Powell is a Professor of Education and affiliated Professor of Sociology, Organizational Behavior, Management Science and Engineering and Communications at Stanford University. Powell is a member of the Public Policy faculty. Powell’s recent research focuses on the consequences of the increasing professionalization of the nonprofit sector, and its effects on both organizational viability and democratic participation.

Research Interests: . Consequences of the increasing professionalization of the nonprofit sector and its effects on both organizational viability and democratic participation . The uses and ramifications of strategic planning and program evaluation by nonprofits . The growing commercial engagement of universities and its impact on public science . Local contracts as transparent channels for information transfer and labor market transmission mechanisms

• Bruce Sievers, Associated Faculty

Bruce Sievers is a Senior Fellow of the Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors, Consulting Director of the Skirball Foundation, Visiting Scholar at the Center on Philanthropy and Civil Society, and former Director of the Walter and Elise Haas Fund. He additionally serves on the Advisory Board for the Stanford Social Innovation Review and writes a regular column for Alliance magazine.

Sievers consults with Stanford faculty, students and staff on philanthropy and the nonprofit sector. He teaches an undergraduate course on civil society and the nonprofit sector. He also recently completed a book titled Civil Society, Philanthropy and the Fate of the Commons.

Research Interests: • The balance of public and private aspects of modern life in a manner that allows individual freedom and also makes possible the effective pursuit of the common good • Historical trends in the formation of philanthropy and civil society

Stanford Center on Philanthropy and Civil Society Undergraduate Student Research Fellows Funding Proposal October 13, 2010 • Lucy Bernholz, Associated Faculty

Lucy Bernholz is the Founder and President of Blueprint Research & Design, Inc., a strategy consulting firm specializing in program research and design for philanthropic foundations and is responsible for developing and managing grant programs in the arts and humanities, community development, education, environment, health, historic preservation, and human services. She also supervised the implementation of special initiatives focused on neighborhood development, lesbian and gay community issues, management assistance, citizenship, and early adolescence. As a consultant, Bernholz has developed grant strategies on a wide range of social issues for foundations, individuals, and corporations.

Research Interests: . The creation of philanthropic capital markets . Technology and philanthropy . Social justice and community foundations . Philanthropy associations as political actors

Further support to fellows will be provided by Program Manager, Shana Sachs and graduate student interns, who will be available to coordinate events, answer questions regarding the research process, and help to link the fellows’ research to community activities and action.

Stanford Center on Philanthropy and Civil Society Undergraduate Student Research Fellows Funding Proposal October 13, 2010 Date: October 13, 2010

To: Harry J. Elam, Jr. Vice Provost for Undergraduate Education From: Christopher Bobonich, Director of Undergraduate Students, Philosophy RE: VPUE Grant-Undergraduate Research: Departmental Grant Philosophy Research Proposal

We are pleased to present our Philosophy proposal to VPUE.

Program Structure The program has several goals, the most important of which is to provide undergraduates with the opportunity to engage in full-time scholarly research under the close supervision of a faculty member. Such guided research will further the education of undergraduates as well as allow undergraduates to develop research skills specific to philosophy. We expect that the development of such skills under the supervision of a faculty member will prove invaluable for students choosing to pursue independent research in the future. Furthermore, we hope that by providing this opportunity we also allow students to better assess whether they wish to pursue such research, possibly leading to the writing of an honors thesis, in the future. Lastly, we hope that this program will serve as an example to other humanities departments, encouraging them to establish their own research programs. We have, I think, had some success in this.

We shall work especially hard to ensure that students develop their research skills and that we do a better job of showing them what skills can be developed in the work that they are doing.

Mentoring Each project will have a faculty mentor and we expect that the faculty member will meet for at least half an hour every two weeks with the student during the quarter. We continue to review carefully the evaluations for our grant. We are generally pleased with most parts of the student comments on mentoring and on the benefits to the students. We are especially pleased that we scored so far above the average on (1) gaining an understanding of faculty member's research and how it fits with their work, (2) the research gave the students a broad idea of what research in the program is about, and, perhaps the most important question of all, (3) whether the student would recommend the project to another undergraduate. We shall continue to try to find better ways for the students to present their work to an audience outside the faculty advisor. Our research projects, for example, don't easily lend themselves to postering, but we shall focus on these issues. We do meet at luncheon meetings where the students have an opportunity to share their research with other researchers and faculty.

Research Activities We see undergraduate research in philosophy as falling into five categories: (1) Scholarly Projects: Students will read, translate, collate, and analyze manuscripts. (2) Literature Review: Students will read through and attain familiarity with large volumes of literature, analyzing and reporting their findings. (3) Logic: Students will develop formal and informal proofs and research the implication of the proofs. (4) Course Development: Students will aid in conducting research necessary for the design and enhancement of philosophy courses using the methods of literature review. (5) Innovative philosophical projects: The Stanford Philosophy Department has undertaken a number of innovate projects that do not fall neatly into more traditional categories 1-4, including. In particular, both (a) the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, an internet Encyclopedia that is widely recognized as an innovate blend of technology and scholarship and (b) “Philosophy Talk,” an innovate radio program that seeks to bring Philosophy to the public radio airwaves may provide regular research opportunities for undergraduates. Some undergraduates’ research will be entirely in one category, while others’ research will span multiple categories. This year one of our students is working on a new sort of project: developing the website Bartholomew’s World (BW) offers a systematic introduction to medieval natural philosophy at an introductory level. It includes three teaching tools that offer an introduction to the fun of reading and understanding Latin medieval works in their original context: an interactive website encyclopedia, a student sourcebook, and a teacher's guide. Undergraduate student assistants have prepared translations, studied etymology, designed exercises, hunted down manuscript images, searched for relevant links, etc. etc. Website encyclopedia: bartholomew.stanford.edu.

Recruitment Plans Faculty: The Committee will distribute to all faculty members in the department a Request for Proposals to participate in the program. Proposals must describe the nature of the faculty member’s project as well as the specific responsibilities of the student contributing to the project. Proposals must also specify the time commitment the faculty member will make to the student. Faculty are expected to be in residence during most of the program period and to meet with the student weekly for at least one hour to discuss the student’s progress. Lastly, proposals must specify what courses and background reading, if any, the student would have to complete before the start of the program. The committee will then select the proposals to receive funding based on the appropriateness of the proposed tasks for an undergraduate and the level of contact that the undergraduate will have with the mentor and the committee will ensure that the proposed research has a substantial intellectual component and will help the students gain research skills. Students: The Program Director will send an introductory email to declared majors and other students who expressed interest in philosophy courses explaining the details of the research program. The email will include descriptions of the chosen faculty projects as well as information requested by the faculty members, e.g., a resume or an unofficial transcript. Students will then determine which projects interest them and contact the relevant faculty. Individual faculty members will have final responsibility for interviewing and selecting their undergraduate research assistants. If a faculty member is unable to find a student qualified to work on her project she will notify the Oversight Committee. The committee will then select a different proposal to receive funding and will advertise that project to the relevant lists. The program will be open to majors and non-majors alike. Though preference will be given to majors, non-majors with sufficient background and relevant interests will be eligible if no interested and qualified major is available. To ensure that all students have the analytical reading and writing skills necessary for philosophical research, students will be required to have successfully completed Philosophy 80, the department’s Writing in the Major, prior to participating in the program. Faculty may also specify additional courses and background reading that they require the student to complete.

Student Product Students will contribute significantly to the research project of their mentor. Written products will vary, but may include course materials for faculty and students, written reports, reconstructions of arguments, literature reviews, proofs, or, in the case of “Philosophy Talk” outlines of relevant background issues. Twice a year, the department will hold a forum for students who participated in the research program to discuss the results of their work with other students and faculty. The main purpose of this forum will be to inspire other students and other faculty to participate in the program.

The Program Director will email students and faculty in the middle of each quarter and the end of each project. This will provide the opportunity for improvement both in the current program and in future programs. The Director will ask students to respond to questions regarding the value of the program, how they spend an average day, how often they meet with their mentor, and in what areas the program could be improved. Questions posed to faculty will focus largely on which tasks have proven successful and which unsuccessful for the undergraduate. The Director will then be in a position to suggest improvements to faculty based on the success of the tasks.

Proposed Philosophy Research budget for 2010-11

Description Budget Fall, Winter, Spring Student salaries 10 – 12 students at approximately 650 hrs $ 9,000 Summer Researcher salary 10 – 12 students /approximately 1,280 hrs $18,000 Supplies Research materials and presentations $ 350 Program Expenses For meetings, workshops and presentations $ 650 Total $ 28,000

2011 UNDERGRADUATE SUMMER RESEARCH PROGRAM PROPOSAL PHYSICS/APPLIED PHYSICS/SLAC

Summary: Request to support 30 students full-time in Summer 2011, with an additional 5 students if funding allows.

1. Research Program Goals

Physics and Engineering Physics majors will join research groups for 8 or 10 weeks of full time work over the summer. The goals are to both perform academic physics research itself, as well as to learn the process/sociology/survival skills of academic research life by being a full member of the research group for those 8 or 10 weeks.

We accept students from all three rising classes—sophomore, junior, senior—whether inexperienced or experienced. For the former, our program is intended as a first research experience and a chance to learn about one subfield of physics in some depth. For experienced students, the program strives to serve as a springboard for research that can later be incorporated into a Senior Honors thesis. We strive to provide every physics major with at least one summer of funding for research.

The program is open to majors in both Physics and Engineering Physics. Although students working with Physics/AP/SLAC faculty are given preference in selection, students also may work with faculty in closely allied departments whose research has a strong physics component. In the past this has included faculty in Biology, Chemistry, Bioengineering and Radiology. The exception is that students who wish to work with faculty in the School of Engineering are asked to apply to the relevant department’s summer research program. We work with the School of Engineering to coordinate student applications, reducing confusion for the student as to which program they should apply.

2. Program Activities

The 2011 Program again is sponsored jointly by Physics, Applied Physics (AP) and SLAC and contains the following elements:

• Student Research Students secure sponsorship from department faculty in January/February. They submit a short outline of proposed research and commit to working full-time on their project for the duration of the program. Students present a poster of their work at the end of the summer, and submit a summary detailing their research experiences during the summer.

• Poster Session At the end of the summer, a poster session and BBQ is held in the Varian/Physics&Astronomy building complex. Students whose work is in progress and not quite ready for presentation are asked to present their progress to date, and then encouraged to present the finished work at one of the SURPS forums held during Autumn or Winter quarter. In 2010,

• Faculty Seminars and Lab Tours Held weekly at lunchtime, these are given by faculty who commit to advising and supporting a Summer Research Fellow; lab tours are given as appropriate. These seminars expose students to a range of physics sub disciplines and cutting-edge research. Seminars also provide a means for

Page 1 of 6 students from disparate research labs to interact at least once a week. Talks from researchers outside academia are occasionally scheduled. The listing of Faculty seminars from Summer 2010 is listed below, and also can be found at physics-summer-research.stanford.edu .

2010 Physics/AP/SLAC Summer Research Speakers DATE WHO DEPT TITLE Thurs, 6/24 Naoko Kurahashi Applied Physics Neutrino Physics Thurs, 7/1 Kam Moler Physics Quantum Whirlpools Thurs, 7/8 Eric Colby SLAC Research and Careers in Accelerator Physics Thurs, 7/15 Phil Scherrer Physics/HEPL New Views of the Sun with Solar Dynamics Observatory Thurs, 7/22 Juan Alonso Aero/Astro Design of Future Aircraft to Minimize Environmental Impact Thurs, 7/29 Shamit Kachru Physics Surprises in Quantum Gravity Thurs, 8/5 Steve Block AP/Biology Biophysics of Gene Regulation, Studied One Molecule At A Time Thurs, 8/12 Lei Xing Radiation Oncology From Physics to Molecular Image Guided Radiation Therapy Thurs, 8/19 Hideo Mabuchi Applied Physics Tracking Fluorescence Correlation Spectroscopy of Individual Biomolecules Tues, 8/26 Rick Pam Physics Poster Info Session

• Field Trips The program aims to offer students a tour of SLAC and one other offsite scientific facility in the Bay Area. These serve both educational and social bonding purposes. Past tours have included Lick Observatory and Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory. In 2009 there were no offsite tours due to budget constraints; this included SLAC due to the latter’s own budget and safety issues. In 2010 the group went on a tour of the development labs at SLAC, visiting areas not normally seen by the public, but a planned tour of the IBM-Almaden Research Center was canceled due to budget constraints. If the budget is available in 2011, we plan to take the IBM tour.

• Social Events At the outset of the program, participants attend a casual breakfast gathering hosted by the program coordinator. Here they have the opportunity to meet fellow researchers, ask questions and address any concerns they may have. The breakfast also serves as a forum for students to provide feedback on such issues as scheduled field trips, guest speakers, housing and other program related issues.

One or two other social events will be planned to facilitate student interaction (and relaxation). Examples of past events include bowling nights, beach trips and hiking excursions. Friday afternoon liquid nitrogen ice cream also has become a tradition.

• Mentoring/Progress Assessment The Program includes an Academic Director, whose duties include mentoring students, making sure they have a well defined plan for their work, acting as ombudsman as necessary, organizing the faculty seminars, and developing additional programming. The Director meets with each student at least once during the summer to discuss research goals, progress and any issues that arise; these issues usually are work-related but occasionally personal issues affect the student’s work performance.

3. Program Size and Budget:

The proposed program size is 30 students with an option for 35 students if sufficient budget is available. The proposed budget is

$175,800 30 students $203,800 35 students

In order to extend the budget in 2010, we initiated the option of 8 or 10 week stipends; students could apply for either length of time. Five students opted for an 8-week stipend, and this allowed one additional student to be funded. We plan to continue this option in 2011.

The following data show the program size for Summer 2010: 37 Physics and Engineering Physics majors working for 30 faculty members in Physics, Applied Physics, SLAC, Bioengineering, Aero/Astro and various Medical School departments. 30 of these students were funded by the VPUE- funded Physics/AP/SLAC program (25 for ten weeks, 5 for eight weeks), reduced from the initially- planned 35 students due to mid-year budget reductions. Additional funding came from Student Major Grants and faculty research funds.

# of Faculty by Dept AP: 5 Physics 13 SLAC 5.5 Med School 4 Bioengineering 1 Other (Bio, Aero Astro) 1.5

Faculty total 30

Funding sources: VPUE 30 Student Major Grants 4 Faculty Research funds 3

Student total 37

Also in 2010 the program had 41 applicants, of which 37 eventually participated in research using the above sources of funding. While this is a lower number than in 2009, during the application process we informed students of the budget constraints, and this seemed to hold down the number of younger (rising sophomore) applicants. For 2011, we note that the number of Physics majors is steady, while the number of Engineering Physics majors continues to increase. Given last summer’s successful program, we would like to request funding for 35 students. However, understanding the budget realities, our proposed budget 2011 is for 30 students, with a request for an additional 5 students if funding is available.

In further recognition of budget constraints, the Physics Dept will continue to support the salary of the Academic Director—this is an expense supported by the VPUE in the past. This cost is estimated as $10,490 for 2011, for January through August. The only expenses beyond the actual stipends will be the direct costs of student community-building activities (faculty seminars, tours, etc).

4. Plan for faculty and administrative oversight of the program

The program will proceed as in prior years, managed by Physics Dept staff. The selection process will include input from all three departments. The department personnel for this joint effort are:

Prof. Hari Manoharan, Physics, Director of Undergraduate Study Prof. Hideo Mabuchi, Applied Physics, Chair Prof. Aaron Roodman, SLAC PPA Faculty Rick Pam, Lecturer in Physics, Academic Director for Summer Research Program Elva Carbajal, Physics, Undergraduate Student Services

Prof’s Manoharan, Mabuchi, Roodman, plus Rick Pam, will comprise the selection committee to review and prioritize the applications. Prof. Manoharan will have primary faculty oversight responsibility. Academic Director Pam will have responsibility to supervise the application and selection process, mentor student participants, making sure they have a well defined plan for their work, act as ombudsman as necessary, organize the faculty seminars, and develop additional programming as required. Administrative tasks and budget reporting will be handled by Elva Carbajal. Manoharan and Pam will consult as necessary in the event of conflicts, performance problems or other issues that might arise on the part of either faculty or students.

5. Description of the research or scholarly activities in which students will be engaged

Students are expected to become a full-fledged member of their research group. The type of research (experiment, theory, numerical modeling, etc), size of the research group and the student’s experience often dictate the initial assignment. A student may be given a computer task or project to perform completely independently, may initially assist a graduate student with the latter’s project, or anywhere in between. Regardless of the initial work, students are encouraged to become immersed in the research life and literature of the group as quickly as possible, doing outside studying and reading, attending group meetings and other normal grad student activities such as finding free donuts. We ask faculty with larger groups to ensure that the student is assigned a day-to-day mentor contact, preferably at the post-doc level; in these cases the faculty mentor is asked to interact with the student at least weekly.

6. Procedures and requirements for recruitment of students and faculty

Our program will continue to be open to all Physics and Engineering Physics majors. As a minimal show of commitment, we ask that students declare either major prior to the start of summer research. This requires the student to choose and meet with their new Major advisor before the end of Spring quarter. Non-physics majors are eligible to apply to the program if they work with a faculty member in Physics, AP or SLAC; such students will of course have a lower priority than that of Physics majors.

As in past years, we plan to cross list our program with the Geophysics Department. We will also cross-list School of Engineering programs available to Engineering Physics students. These cross- listings will appear on our summer research web page, http://physics-summer-research.stanford.edu

Faculty will be recruited by Rick Pam, with assistance from Prof’s Manoharan, Mabuchi and Roodman in their respective departments (see Item 4, above). To match students with faculty, a list of available positions will be published on the web (for 2010 positions, see http://www.stanford.edu/dept/physics/academics/summer/2010positions.html)

Students will be responsible for contacting individual faculty and scheduling an interview, in a process akin to how graduate students find research groups. The personnel listed in #4, above, will be available to counsel students who, for whatever reason (inexperience, shyness), need assistance in this process.

Once the student has secured the sponsorship of a faculty mentor, they will submit a short description of their proposed work, including a summary of the overall research, and their expected participation in the work.

7. Student Product

The program concludes with a Poster Session and BBQ on the last day. Students present a poster of their work, and the entire Physics community at Stanford is invited. Turnout is quite large. Students whose work is not quite finished are asked to present instead at one of the SURPS sessions in the Autumn or Spring.

8. Plan for program evaluation

Students are asked to fill out the VPUE online evaluation form at the end of the summer. They also submit a 1-2 page summary detailing their research experiences during the summer. These evaluations are reviewed to plan the next year’s program.

In addition, we ask the faculty to complete an evaluation form for their summer student, commenting both on the students’ performance and any other aspects of the program they feel need improvement.

2010 Results

Students filled out a paper evaluation form at the end of the summer (paper in order to increase the response rate)—22 of the 30 VPUE Department Grant recipients responded. Various aspects of the program were rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 being the highest. Some important results:

1. Availability of faculty advisor: 4.0 2. Availability of post doc or grad student daily contact: 4.6 3. Quality of Faculty Seminars: 3.6 4. Overall Research Environment: 4.4

#1 above, “Availability of Faculty Advisor”, is traditionally the category most likely to have student dissatisfaction. This year, of the 22 responses, there was one score of “2” , six scores of “3” , and the balance were 4 and 5. However, with one exception, those who gave low scores also gave high scores to their postdoc daily contact.

A number of students had comments about the weekly Faculty Seminars. Four of the speakers were universally applauded, two of the speakers were rated very low by most students, and the rest were given mixed reviews on the student’s inherent interest in the topic. Several comments suggested adding one or two speakers from outside academia who are nonetheless involved in physics-related endeavors; this will be taken into account when planning the 2011 seminar lineup. 2011 Proposed Budget Physics/AP/SLAC Summer Research DESCRIPTION 30 students 35 Student Stipends (Budget =30 @ $5600) 168000 Academic Director salary 8030 Benefits @30.6% 2460 Additional 5 stipends@5600 28000 Subtotal $178,490 Poster session Easel rental (45 @ $9.80 ea) 450 Printing, Ink 200 Poster Board 150 Subtotal $800 Student Misc. Student social events (2) 1000 Offsite tour (bus rental) 1200 Ingredients for LN2 ice cream 100 Subtotal $2,300 Seminars Lunch for seminars (10 weekly ea @ $350) + 1 extra 3850 Subtotal $3,850 Food Welcome Orientation and Final Poster Presentation BBQ SRC Overview Orientation , January 2011 250 Poster Session BBQ 600 Subtotal $850

TOTAL FUNDS REQUIRED: $186,290 $214,290 Less Advisor salary/benefits (absorbed by Physics Dept) -10490 -10490

TOTAL REQUEST FROM VPUE: $175,800 $203,800 30 students 35 students Political Science Program for Undergraduate Research Proposed Budget, 2010‐2011

Student Stipends and Wages Summer: 24 students x $5600/student 134,400 Fall: 12 students x 80 hours x $14/hour 13,440 Winter: 12 students x 80 hours x $14/hour 13,440 Spring: 12 students x 80 hours x $14/hour 13,440

Student Research Supplies Summer 2,000 Academic year 1,000

Other Program Expenses Food for twice‐weekly research seminars 9,000 Stipend for faculty director (4 quarters) 7,000 Stipend for 5‐day course on research methods 4,000 Social activities for SRC participants 2,000

Total 199,720 POLITICAL SCIENCE PROGRAM FOR UNDERGRADUATE RESEARCH PROPOSAL FOR 2010-2011

1. GOALS

Our program has three main goals. First, we aim to involve undergraduates in faculty-led research. Each year we match undergraduates with appropriate mentors, and we provide stipends and administrative support to facilitate collaboration between students and faculty.

Second, we build a research community. We gather undergraduates, graduate students, and faculty for semiweekly seminars and social events, and we integrate undergraduates into multigenerational research teams. By connecting researchers who have diverse substantive interests, methodological approaches, and levels of experience, we offer participants a broader perspective than they would gain with only one professor. Undergraduates learn how the topics and methods they explore with their mentor compare with the work of others. This is especially important in Political Science, a large and diverse field.

Third, we aim to increase the number of first-rate honors theses. By providing opportunities to participate in research, our program helps undergraduates decide whether to undertake their own projects and gives them skills to produce high-quality theses. The program also establishes a support network that students can tap as they make the transition from assisting faculty to conducting independent research.

2. STRUCTURE AND ORGANIZATION

The current structure is working well, and we propose to retain it—with a few noteworthy innovations—in 2010-2011.

2.1 Summer Program The summer program has two main components. First, students spend ten weeks working with faculty on research projects of mutual interest. In our program, faculty directly mentor students and may not pass this responsibility to a graduate student. Before the summer program begins, each mentor must meet with his/her student to discuss expectations and recommend background reading, if necessary. We require faculty to be in residence for most of the mentorship period and to meet regularly with students to discuss the progress of assigned research.

The second component of the summer program is a research workshop, which meets twice per week. At the workshop, students and faculty present research in progress, and they introduce our community to analytic methods. Students and faculty collaborate in preparing the presentations, and then students take the spotlight by delivering the talks themselves. In summers 2005-2010, we combined the Political Science and International Relations research workshops in order to expose students to a wider range of research projects; to build a more extensive research community; and to introduce students to faculty they might not otherwise have a chance to meet. As the student and faculty evaluations (see supplementary document II) attest, the research

1 workshop is one of the most popular components of our summer program. We plan to continue the joint Polisci-IR workshop in summer 2010-2011.

Students who participate in the summer program also receive shared office space. We provide offices for three reasons: to put the students in closer physical proximity to faculty; to increase interaction between students who are working together in the same office; and to give students computer equipment, bookshelf space, and other necessities for research.

2.2 Academic-Year Program Our program runs not only during the summer, but also during the academic year. Some professors continue to train students they mentored during the summer; others work with a new crop of undergraduate researchers. By offering positions year-round, our program reaches a large number of undergraduates, including those who cannot be at Stanford during the summer. It also offers a more comprehensive view of the research process. Most projects in political science require more than ten weeks to complete. Students who participate in our program for several quarters can contribute to multiple phases of research, thereby putting them in a better position to launch projects of their own.

2.3 Innovations for 2010-2011 Based on feedback from students and faculty, we propose a new “crash course” in research methods during the first week of the summer program. Students will gather for lectures about a wide range of methods used in political science, including statistical analysis, qualitative analysis, and experiments. The crash course, which will run for a couple of hours per day for five days, will have two benefits: it will jumpstart the research process by teaching students new tools at the beginning of the summer; and it will give all students a common basis for understanding and commenting upon presentations at our semiweekly research seminar.

Some students in our program asked for more interaction with students in other summer research college programs, including the programs in economics and public policy. In summer 2011, we will try to facilitate those cross-disciplinary interactions through social and academic events with other summer research college programs.

Some students wanted more time to present their work. This request is difficult to address, given that the summer is only 10 weeks long. However, we will consider increasing the number and/or length of the lunchtime seminars, to give students additional opportunities to share their work.

3. OVERSIGHT AND RECRUITMENT

As in previous years, Professor Michael Tomz will oversee the development and implementation of the program. He will head an Oversight Committee that includes a representative from each of the four main branches of political science: American politics, comparative politics, international relations, and political theory. Our Undergraduate Program Administrator and our Department Manager will provide additional support.

2 If our funding is renewed for 2010-2011, Tomz will invite all members of the faculty to submit proposals for participation in PSPUR. Proposals must (1) relate directly to an active research project in which the faculty member is currently engaged; (2) describe the nature of the project, the specific responsibilities of the student, the time commitment the faculty member will make to the student, and the ultimate work the student will produce; (3) specify what previous experience and training, if any, the student should have to pursue the research; and (4) include a sample of background reading to provide an intellectual foundation for the student researcher.

Tomz will assess proposals to ensure that projects are well defined and would be appropriate for undergraduates. If faculty interest exceeds available financial resources, as has been the case every summer, Professor Tomz—in consultation with the Oversight Committee—will select the strongest proposals for inclusion. The Political Science Department will then advertise approved projects as widely as possible. Declared majors, as well as undeclared undergraduates in political science lectures and seminars, will be able to log onto the department website and read about available projects. Interested students may apply directly to a faculty member or submit their resume and cover letter to the program administrators, who will aid in matching students and faculty based on mutual interests. Individual faculty members will have final responsibility for interviewing and selecting the undergraduates they will mentor, but the Oversight Committee will superintend the process.

As in previous years, Tomz will run the semiweekly summer research seminar. He will also meet with students and faculty to address questions about the program, and he will collect and implement feedback about how to improve the program.

4. STUDENT ACTIVITIES

Undergraduates will engage in a wide range of research activities. They will review academic literature, gather and analyze data, design and carry out experiments, write questions for public opinion surveys, etc. Students will also present their findings in a semiweekly seminar run jointly by the political science and international relations undergraduate research programs. Participants in the summer program are expected to work full-time for ten weeks; participants during the academic year may work up to 10 hours per week.

The nature of the research will vary, depending on the substantive and methodological interests of students and faculty. Last summer, students engaged in the following activities (see supplementary documents 2 for more details):

 Used documents from the Hoover archives to create a nationwide database of school enrollment and political party affiliation in Iraq under the regime of Saddam Hussein;  Built a database of antidumping cases that countries filed with the World Trade organization, and analyzed how domestic political variables affected the likelihood of litigation success in the WTO;  Generated digital maps of historical congressional districts, matched them with available census data, and used them to study party politics in the United States in the late 19th century;

3  Used declassified government documents and other source materials to build a time line of human rights trials in foreign countries, and to analyze the arguments participants made;  Analyzed the design of election ballots in each of the U.S. states, and wrote a manuscript that was suitable for publication;  Collected data and wrote an academic literature review about whether—and under what conditions—foreign aid is effective in achieving development goals;  Studied how researchers use the concept of “governance” in political science and economics, and evaluated the validity and reliability of existing measures of governance;  Wrote case studies, collected numeric data, and wrote a literature review about emergency efficiency policies around the world;  Built and analyzed a dataset about the money that public sector unions contribute to state- level political campaigns;  Analyzed the connections between members of Congress and nonprofit organizations, and built a databasde of those connections;  Built and analyzed a precinct-level dataset of election results for the 2000 and 2008 U.S. presidential elections;  Summarized the literature about nuclear proliferation and the the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, and wrote case studies about states that might be pursuing nuclear weapons;  Researched international territorial disputes, developed digital maps of territorial claims, and analyzed data to understand why states have conflicted claims about territory;  Analyzed data, created figures and powerpoint presentations, and compiled an annotated bibliography of literature about the role of religion in American politics;  Wrote reviews of the academic literature about risk aversion, rationality, sortition, and other topics related to the use of lotteries;  Completed a large database about foreign investment over the past century, and prepared and analyzed a large number of public opinion polls about foreign investment;  Designed, programmed, and populated a database about the career histories of politicians across 15 federal elections in India.

These kinds of research activities contribute to the education of Stanford undergraduates in many ways. For example, the activities help undergraduates define their intellectual interests. Through our program, undeclared majors have opportunities to explore the field of political science and decide whether to make it a focus of study. Declared majors gain exposure to a wide range of potentially interesting topics and methodologies, putting them in a better position to identify topics for independent research.

The research activities also give students the tools to conduct independent research. For a decade, the Political Science Department has required all honors students to enroll in a special research workshop in the fall of their senior year. This seminar exposes students to the challenges and responsibilities of completing a yearlong research project, and it allows them to complete a polished research design that will guide work on their honors theses. Our undergraduate research program serves as an important feeder to this seminar. We hope the program encourages more students to consider writing an honors thesis and improves the quality of the final product.

4 5. PROGRAM EVALUATION

Students and faculty will fill out a formal evaluation at the end of the summer. Tomz will ask students to reflect, in writing, on the following types of questions: What aspects of the program have been most beneficial to you? How could we improve the PSPUR? We will pose a parallel set of questions for faculty, and use the information to make the program more valuable for both students and faculty.

Evaluations from the past summers were overwhelmingly positive. In previous years we have submitted copies of all evaluations, and we would be happy to supply them again upon request. Here, we summarize the main themes.

• 156 students participated in our program during the past nine summers. More than 99 percent of students who completed evaluations said they would recommend the program to other students. Moreover, every professor who mentored an undergraduate indicated that he/she would participate again if given the opportunity. We regard this as an especially strong endorsement of our program.

• Many students commented that the program taught them about the nature of political science research and encouraged them to continue it through honors theses.

• Students also stressed that that the experience was intellectually stimulating and an important part of their undergraduate education.

We continue to improve the program in response to feedback from faculty and students. In academic year 2010-11, we plan to introduce a one-week “crash-course” in research methods for participants. We also hope to encourage even more interaction among participants by scheduling more social events for students and faculty.

6. SUMMARY OF OUTCOMES

Over the past nine summers, 36 professors in our department have mentored 156 undergraduates on a wide range of projects in every sub-field of political science. Faculty at every rank, from assistant professor to full professor, have participated. The program has been extremely popular: more than 99 percent of student participants said they would recommend the program to other students, and every professor who mentored an undergraduate indicated that he/she would participate again if given the opportunity. We hope the VPUE will continue to supporting our program, which, we believe, makes important contributions to undergraduate education at Stanford.

5 Political Science Program for Undergraduate Research Supplement 1: Participants and Research Projects, Summer 2010

Eighteen students participated either part-time or full-time in the summer 2010 program. They were mentored by seventeen faculty members. Names and project titles appear below.

Student: Shine-Zaw Aung Professor: Ken Schultz Project: Mapping Territorial Conflict

Student: Aysha Bagchi Professor: Rob Reich Project: Nonprofit Organizations and Elected Politicians

Student: Maria Bowe Professor: Karen Jusko Project: Electoral Geography and the Partisan Representation of the Poor

Student: Ellen Cerf Professor: Jon Krosnick Project: The Psychology of Americans' Political Decisions

Student: Erin Dexter Professor: Scott Sagan Project: The Causes of Nuclear Proliferation

Student: Daniel Fang Professor: Judy Goldstein Project: Trade, National Treatment and National Differences in a Globalized World

Student: Matt Guio Professors: David Laitin and Steve Krasner Project: Cross-National Indicators of Governance

Student: Andy Hiller Professor: Jonathan Rodden Project: Mapping elections in the United States

Student: Deepa Kannappan Professor: Jonathan Wand Project: Causes and Consequences of Incumbency in Comparative Perspective

Student: Ma Jiating Ma Professor: Peter Stone Project: Lotteries and Non-Reasoned Decision-Making

Student: Katie McKeon Professor: Terry Moe Project: Impact of Public Sector Unions on American Politics and Public Policy

Student: Miguel Molina Professor: Gary Segura Project: The Role of Religion in American Politics

Student: Alessandra Moss Professor: Terry Karl Project: Human Rights, Politics and the Courts: The Problem

Student: Minh Nguyen Professor: David Laitin and Steve Krasner Project: Cross-National Indicators of Governance

Student: Rahul Pandey Professor: Jonathan Wand Project: Causes and Consequences of Incumbency in Comparative Perspective

Student: Alison Roy-Ting Professor: Mike Tomz Project: Foreign Direct Investment

Student: Fatima Wagdy Professor: Lisa Blaydes Project: Understanding Arab Autocracy

Student: Cathy Zhu Professor: Phillip Lipscy Project: The Political Economy of Energy Efficiency VPUE Departmental Grant for Undergraduate Research Department of Political Science

Supplemental Document II

Faculty and Student Evaluations, Summer 2010 Faculty Evaluation: Lisa Blaydes

Summer 2010

1. With whom did you work, and what was the title of the research project?

Fatima Wagdy, Inside Arab Autocracy

2. Briefly describe the research activities in which the student was involved.

Fatima was responsible for compiling data from the Hoover Archive Iraq Memory Foundation Collection. In particular, she created a nationwide, district-level dataset based on the Iraqi school registers which provided information on the political activities and preferences of Iraqi high school seniors, as collected by the Ba’th Party. This included information on party ID, whether a student’s family had close ties to the regime as well as if they had volunteered to participate in some of Saddam Hussein’s elite “commando” units.

3. Comment on whether/how the program contributed to the student's education. What research skills and/or substantive knowledge did the student develop over the course of the summer? How might the experience help the student write an honors thesis or pursue other independent research?

I believe that Fatima learned a great deal about the way that research is conducted, particularly how what might appear to be “qualitative” data might be turned into a large-scale quantitative dataset. Based on my conversations with Fatima, I believe that she is very strongly considering writing a senior thesis using other parts of Iraq Memory Foundation dataset. I believe working with these data also enhanced her language skills tremendously, particularly her ability to work with archival sources.

4. Discuss any ways in which the program was beneficial to you.

By the end of the summer, Fatima had created a dataset of almost all Iraqi governorates that included all of the political indicators described above as well as additional information including the ethnic ID of the student, the type of high school that he attended, as well as other information. This is a tremendously valuable dataset for me as I hope to soon begin statistical analysis of the data allowing me to test hypothesis about co-optation and repression in authoritarian regimes.

5. What aspects of the program did you like the most, and what changes would you recommend for next year?

I think that the twice weekly meetings are a wonderful opportunity for both students and faculty to learn about each others’ work. I would recommend that the program move to a year round schedule, though with a less intense pace of research, of course, in the academic year.

6. Would you participate in this program if we offered it again next summer?

Absolutely! Faculty Evaluation: Judy Goldstein

Summer 2010

1. With whom did you work, and what was the title of the research project?

Daniel Fang

2. Briefly describe the research activities in which the student was involved.

Student built a data set of antidumping cases in the WTO.

3. Comment on whether/how the program contributed to the student's education. What research skills and/or substantive knowledge did the student develop over the course of the summer? How might the experience help the student write an honors thesis or pursue other independent research?

Daniel is an economics major interested in China. This project allowed him to think about issues of trade and I think he will go on and take classes on trade and trade policy making. It also made him interested in law, which was not something he had thought about prior to this summer. Yes, I think he will do an honor's these on something about Chinese trade.

4. Discuss any ways in which the program was beneficial to you.

Daniel is going to continue to work on the domestic variables that explain litigation success in the WTO. This is a project I am planning on using in joint work I am conducting with a professor at UCLA.

5. What aspects of the program did you like the most, and what changes would you recommend for next year?

I thought the program ran well and I would use the same structure next year.

6. Would you participate in this program if we offered it again next summer?

Yes.

Faculty Evaluation: Karen Jusko

Summer 2010

1. With whom did you work, and what was the title of the research project?

Maria Bowe and Vivian Wong.

2. Briefly describe the research activities in which the student was involved.

Maria and Vivian worked to generate digital copies of maps of historical congressional districts, and to integrate available census data.

3. Comment on whether/how the program contributed to the student's education. What research skills and/or substantive knowledge did the student develop over the course of the summer? How might the experience help the student write an honors thesis or pursue other independent research?

This research required extensive training in geographic information systems (GIS), and data management, more generally. We had many discussions about strategies for verifying historical data; Maria and Vivian also prepared annotated bibliographies on US party politics during the late 19th century. Maria and Vivian are well- prepared to pursue independent research projects using ArcGIS and early US censuses.

4. Discuss any ways in which the program was beneficial to you.

This program was enormously beneficial: Maria and Vivian completed the digitization of 20 historical congressional district maps. These maps will be combined with already existing county boundary maps from this period, and with existing and original census datasets. With these maps, I will be able to map the geographic distribution of income for this period, and evaluate party strategies with regards to the geographic concentration of potential electoral constituencies.

5. What aspects of the program did you like the most, and what changes would you recommend for next year?

I think this program is terrific, and would only recommend (to the extent that it is possible) that group presentations not be combined into a single session.

6. Would you participate in this program if we offered it again next summer?

Yes, definitely. Faculty Evaluation: Terry Karl

Summer 2010

1. With whom did you work, and what was the title of the research project?

I had three research assistants, with one hired from political science and two from other sources, including one from another university with her own money. Their names were Jose Daniel Juarez, Roxana Gareghazlou, and a non- Stanford student. They worked with me on a collaborative research project called: Courts, Politics, and Human Rights, which I am doing in conjunction with professors in the Law School.

2. Briefly describe the research activities in which the student was involved.

I organized this work so that these students could work collaboratively, even though they were working in different languages, including French, Italian and Spanish as well as English. Each student had a specific task, but because they overlapped, they had to meet regularly -- at least once a week together and once a week with me. Each student had specific research sources that I gave them. This included declassified government documents, original materials that I had gathered, and other works. We compiled together several research documents, including a time line, a data base of human rights trials in specific countries, and other things. We looked for discrepancies in various arguments, and we documented networks.

3. Comment on whether/how the program contributed to the student's education. What research skills and/or substantive knowledge did the student develop over the course of the summer? How might the experience help the student write an honors thesis or pursue other independent research?

These students were highly motivated. At least one will try to look at some of these same issues in light of her own country, Iran, and I expect to see a senior honors thesis, which I will advise. A second student learned how to move between Spanish and English sources, and learned how to form rival hypotheses to check his work. A third has asked me to help her in her research at another university and has volunteered to work again with me. Two of the three want to continue this research in the fall and winter, and I am currently looking for means of paying them. Last year's student also wants to do a senior honors thesis and continue this work.

4. Discuss any ways in which the program was beneficial to you.

I cannot thank you enough. I am working in four languages: French, Italian, Spanish and German. While I am proficient in these languages, there is simply too much material, and it has been important to survey all of this. Thus, language capabilities are very important, and these students have learned to research bi-lingually. Their work has been essential in creating a narrative that I am trying to verify in other ways. In my view, the big questions require collaborative work, especially across regions and time, thus the work of these students is critical.

5. What aspects of the program did you like the most, and what changes would you recommend for next year?

I think this is a very important program, and it works well. I very much need more flexibility in the rules, since almost all of my work is based on research in the field. This means I must be absent during the summers. Yet this should not be a problem. While I was here for part of the summer, my students and I set up computer chats, which permitted us to talk face-to face at any time, either as a group or as individuals. We had a set time (wednesdays) to talk every week, so we could converse about what we had found and how to think about it. This is very important for comparative politics work that requires absences and time in the field.

6. Would you participate in this program if we offered it again next summer?

In a heartbeat! Thank you so much.

Faculty Evaluation: Jon Krosnick

Summer 2010

1. With whom did you work, and what was the title of the research project?

Ellen Cerf, who mainly worked on this project: "Ballot Design Law Variation Across the States"

2. Briefly describe the research activities in which the student was involved.

Ellen was involved in various of my group's projects this summer, but her primary time was spent contacting elections officials around the country to determine what the active statutes were determining the order of candidates' names on the ballot and how those statutes were implemented (because the statutes are often written vaguely enough to permit implementation in various different ways). She then wrote a manuscript suitable or publication.

3. Comment on whether/how the program contributed to the student's education. What research skills and/or substantive knowledge did the student develop over the course of the summer? How might the experience help the student write an honors thesis or pursue other independent research?

Ellen learned a great deal about how elections officials operate and how ballots are designed. She learned about the process of translating statute language into actual practice, and she learned how to write a publishable manuscript. She was also exposed to many aspects of survey research methodology, carefully studied the design of questionnaires we had used in major national surveys, and learned about the design of experiments embedded in surveys. All of this was done in close collaboration with graduate students and research staff on my team. The skills she gained in doing research will no doubt help her do her own research in the future.

4. Discuss any ways in which the program was beneficial to you.

It was a great help to have Ellen do her work with us - she enhanced our productivity and produced a valuable and publishable paper.

5. What aspects of the program did you like the most, and what changes would you recommend for next year?

I like the whole thing and recommend no changed (other than allowing faculty to hire more students, because the demand from talented students seems not yet to be met).

6. Would you participate in this program if we offered it again next summer?

Yes.

Faculty Evaluation: Steve Krasner

Summer 2010

[Professor Krasner served as mentor for two projects. For comments on the project with Professor Laitin, see Professor Laitin’s evaluation, below.]

1. With whom did you work, and what was the title of the research project?

Scott Bade, Effectiveness of Foreign Assistance.

2. Briefly describe the research activities in which the student was involved.

Collected data and reviewed literature on foreign assistance.

3. Comment on whether/how the program contributed to the student's education. What research skills and/or substantive knowledge did the student develop over the course of the summer? How might the experience help the student write an honors thesis or pursue other independent research?

Scott is just going into his sophomore so this is a way from any thesis. His substantive interests are actually more historical and more focused on the major power so I am not sure if this research project reoriented his concerns.

4. Discuss any ways in which the program was beneficial to you.

I just could not have gathered the data that Scott helped me with.

5. What aspects of the program did you like the most, and what changes would you recommend for next year?

The presentations are great. I would not change anything

6. Would you participate in this program if we offered it again next summer?

Yes.

Faculty Evaluation: David Laitin

Summer 2010

1. With whom did you work, and what was the title of the research project?

Undergraduates: Matt Guio Minh Nguyen

Graduate: Melissa Lee

Colleague: Stephen Krasner

2. Briefly describe the research activities in which the student was involved.

Students were tasked to see how the concept of governance was specified in the political science and economics literatures, and to evaluate coding schemes on the basis of their external validity and reliability.

3. Comment on whether/how the program contributed to the student's education. What research skills and/or substantive knowledge did the student develop over the course of the summer? How might the experience help the student write an honors thesis or pursue other independent research?

Students were made aware of the implications of coding rules for substantive findings. This is of great importance for any quantitatively based project that either student might do for an Honor's thesis.

4. Discuss any ways in which the program was beneficial to you.

Preparing for and participating in weekly lab meetings with a colleague, a graduate student who is conducting research her own research on the project, and the undergraduate students all together keeps me focused on the project.

5. What aspects of the program did you like the most, and what changes would you recommend for next year?

I'm very happy with the program, and the student presentations are getting better every year, so we must be learning how to do better.

6. Would you participate in this program if we offered it again next summer?

Yes.

Faculty Evaluation: Phillip Lipscy Summer 2010

1. With whom did you work, and what was the title of the research project?

Jared Poelman, Cathy Zhu Political Economy of Energy Efficiency

2. Briefly describe the research activities in which the student was involved.

Data collection on energy efficiency measures and other relevant variables. Literature survey and case studies of policies from various countries.

3. Comment on whether/how the program contributed to the student's education. What research skills and/or substantive knowledge did the student develop over the course of the summer? How might the experience help the student write an honors thesis or pursue other independent research?

The students learned how to read through professional academic articles and generate concise summaries, learned about hypotheses-testing and research methodology, and gained substantive expertise on energy efficiency issues. All of these skills should be valuable for their future research.

4. Discuss any ways in which the program was beneficial to you.

The program was extremely valuable for me as well. The research conducted by the students helped our team generate ideas about the relationship between political variables and energy efficiency outcomes, identify issues and cases worthy of further research, and build up a database containing information about cross-national variation in policies relating to energy efficiency.

5. What aspects of the program did you like the most, and what changes would you recommend for next year?

The program was run very well and I believe it should be continued in its current form.

6. Would you participate in this program if we offered it again next summer?

Yes. Faculty Evaluation: Terry Moe

Summer 2010

1. With whom did you work, and what was the title of the research project?

I worked with Katie Mckeon on a project (co-directed by Sarah Anzia) on public sector unions.

2. Briefly describe the research activities in which the student was involved.

Katie collected data for us and created excel and Stata data sets. Most of the data had to do with state- level campaign contributions by public sector unions and other groups, and had to be downloaded and organized. Very complicated and time consuming, but also fascinating. She also collected various sorts of financial and demographic data.

3. Comment on whether/how the program contributed to the student's education. What research skills and/or substantive knowledge did the student develop over the course of the summer? How might the experience help the student write an honors thesis or pursue other independent research?

I think Katie learned a lot about how public sector unions are involved in politics and the roles they play in state and local government. She also learned a lot about how to collect and organize data, and how a research project is actually carried out. Almost all of her work was on the computer, and involved skills that all researchers need to possess. I am confident that, if she writes an honors thesis, these skills will serve her well in carrying out her own research.

4. Discuss any ways in which the program was beneficial to you.

She collected a wealth of data that we desperately needed, and that would have taken us forever to collect on our own. We benefited immensely by having Katie working for us.

5. What aspects of the program did you like the most, and what changes would you recommend for next year?

Having a research assistant for 40 hours a week for a 10 week stretch is a real luxury. She was able to devote herself to our project as a full time job, and we were able to focus our efforts and get a great deal of work done. I wouldn't recommend any changes.

6. Would you participate in this program if we offered it again next summer?

Absolutely. Faculty Evaluation: Rob Reich

Summer 2010

1. With whom did you work, and what was the title of the research project?

Aysha Bagchi, Nita Bhat, Joshua Freedman

2. Briefly describe the research activities in which the student was involved.

We created a database of all nonprofit organizations that Congresspersons have a formal connection to. http://congressnpo.stanford.edu

3. Comment on whether/how the program contributed to the student's education. What research skills and/or substantive knowledge did the student develop over the course of the summer? How might the experience help the student write an honors thesis or pursue other independent research?

Students learned how to use drupal, to navigate multiple databases, to write and present a research report, and to meet deadlines.

4. Discuss any ways in which the program was beneficial to you.

The project, very simply, would not have been completed without the students.

5. What aspects of the program did you like the most, and what changes would you recommend for next year?

The background support offered by the department is crucial: office space, xerox codes, weekly lunches, etc. Creates esprit de corps.

6. Would you participate in this program if we offered it again next summer?

Yes. Faculty Evaluation: Jonathan Rodden

Summer 2010

1. With whom did you work, and what was the title of the research project?

Andy Hiller and Arden Madsen: Geography of U.S. Elections

2. Briefly describe the research activities in which the student was involved.

Andy and Arden worked on merging precinct-level election results with block-group-level demographics for the 2000 and 2008 presidential elections. They also calculated the distance of each census block group in each major MSA from the centroid of the central business district, from which they generated graphs of race, income, and political behavior as a function of the distance from the city center.

3. Comment on whether/how the program contributed to the student's education. What research skills and/or substantive knowledge did the student develop over the course of the summer? How might the experience help the student write an honors thesis or pursue other independent research?

The students learned a great deal about social science research and geographic information systems. Both are now very well trained in GIS and R, and have expanded their methods skills. I believe they also learned a lot about U.S. demographics and elections. I believe Arden Madsen is likely to write a senior thesis on a related topic.

4. Discuss any ways in which the program was beneficial to you.

I was able to assemble a very useful data set, and some of the information will be used in articles and a book manuscript that I hope to publish in the near future.

5. What aspects of the program did you like the most, and what changes would you recommend for next year?

I participate every year, and do not have any complaints about the program. It would be nice, I suppose, to be able to keep people working, with VPUE funds, continuously into the next year. Moreover, it would be nice to get students started during the school year in some instances, and then get them to ramp up their existing work over the summer. Move toward a year-round model that intensifies in the summer.

6. Would you participate in this program if we offered it again next summer?

Yes! Faculty Evaluation: Scott Sagan

Summer 2010

1. With whom did you work, and what was the title of the research project?

Erin Dexter, on "The Causes of Nuclear Proliferation."

2. Briefly describe the research activities in which the student was involved.

Erin had three main research duties. First, she wrote numerous memos summarizing and critiquing supply- and demand- side literature on nuclear proliferation, both qualitative and quantitative. Second, she analyzed international treaty literature to understand its applicability the function of the nuclear Non-Proliferation treaty, particularly exploring the treaty's relationship to domestic politics. Third, Erin conducted numerous case studies of states identified as possible proliferators. These case studies were used both to update a dataset on nuclear proliferation developed by Singh and Way, and to evaluate the effect of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty on internal decision-making.

3. Comment on whether/how the program contributed to the student's education. What research skills and/or substantive knowledge did the student develop over the course of the summer? How might the experience help the student write an honors thesis or pursue other independent research?

Through the course of the summer, Erin has become a progressively more careful researcher and a clearer communicator of her ideas. While she was a strong research assistant from the beginning, the work she has done, particularly in developing the case studies, has pushed her to more thoroughly explore her sources and to take the extra step to back up her arguments. In her memos on existing literature and international treaties, she has progressively become a deeper thinker, injecting more and more of her own ideas into what she writes. Erin will be applying to law schools this year, and I have no doubt that these skills will benefit her as she pursues a career in the law. Substantively, her work on international treaty law has helped to explore her current interest in international treaty law.

4. Discuss any ways in which the program was beneficial to you.

Once Erin was caught up on the subject area, she proved immensely in conducting research for my article for the Annual Review of Political Science. This piece, reviewing existing literature on the Causes of Nuclear Proliferation, required an extensive analysis of academic articles and books, as well as a good understanding of individual cases of proliferation. I would not have been able to get through all this literature without the help of a researcher like Erin. Our weekly meetings discussing the memos produced were also immensely helpful in developing the ideas to be included in the piece.

5. What aspects of the program did you like the most, and what changes would you recommend for next year?

The single best aspect of the program is simply having a full time research assistant available; this stands in marked contrast to the school year, where students are limited to only a few hours a week. Dedicated research assistants dramatically improves the quality of work of the student.

The most disappointing feature of the program was during the application and selection process. It would be better for me to receive all applications at once, so that I can survey all my options at once. It would also be helpful for the deadline to be moved up so as to avoid losing students to other summer opportunities.

6. Would you participate in this program if we offered it again next summer?

Absolutely. Faculty Evaluation: Kenneth Schultz

Summer 2010

1. With whom did you work, and what was the title of the research project?

The project was titled "Mapping Territorial Conflict" and my RA (from Political Science) was Shine Zaw-Aung.

2. Briefly describe the research activities in which the student was involved.

The student researched interstate territorial disputes in order to (a) understand why the states had conflicting claims to the disputed territory, (b) determine the boundaries of the states' claims, and (c) develop digital maps of the claims using ArcGIS software.

3. Comment on whether/how the program contributed to the student's education. What research skills and/or substantive knowledge did the student develop over the course of the summer? How might the experience help the student write an honors thesis or pursue other independent research?

In addition to learning general research skills and substantive knowledge about territorial disputes, the student was trained in the use of ArcGIS software and particularly the skills needed to generate new maps. Shine was particularly interested in learning this software because he intended to use it in his senior thesis research.

4. Discuss any ways in which the program was beneficial to you.

The research was very valuable in kick-starting a new project that I am undertaking on the sources and effects of territorial disputes. The digital maps will be an important resource to help both in visualization of territorial disputes and in data analysis.

5. What aspects of the program did you like the most, and what changes would you recommend for next year?

I very much enjoy the lunch seminars and the fact that the department provides office space for RAs. No changes are needed, in my view.

6. Would you participate in this program if we offered it again next summer?

Yes.

Faculty Evaluation: Gary Segura

Summer 2010

1. With whom did you work, and what was the title of the research project?

Miguel Molina and Elliott Stoller.

Project Title: The Role of Religion in American Politics.

2. Briefly describe the research activities in which the student was involved.

Bibliographic searches and annotations, data analysis, figure creation, presentation.

3. Comment on whether/how the program contributed to the student's education. What research skills and/or substantive knowledge did the student develop over the course of the summer? How might the experience help the student write an honors thesis or pursue other independent research?

Each student was introduced to data analysis with Stata. They were instructed on finding survey data sets and question wordings, downloading and introductory analysis. In addition, I worked with them on moving past menu-like literature reviews into more constructive, integrated literature surveys that are organized around concepts and arguments.

4. Discuss any ways in which the program was beneficial to you.

Accomplished a ton of bibliographic work for me, as well as jump starting two data analytic efforts.

5. What aspects of the program did you like the most, and what changes would you recommend for next year?

The structure of the presentations is likely necessary but unfortunate. Those going at the beginning have little choice but to present speculative presentations rather than result-driven presentations.

6. Would you participate in this program if we offered it again next summer?

Yes.

Faculty Evaluation: Peter Stone

Summer 2010

1. With whom did you work, and what was the title of the research project?

M.J. Ma worked for me this summer, on a project entitled "Lotteries and Non-Reasoned Decision- Making."

2. Briefly describe the research activities in which the student was involved.

M.J.'s primary assignment was to research various side topics relating to my work. She compiled lists of relevant sources dealing with these topics, then prepared me reports summarizing the literature. These reports were on such topics as the assumption of Constant Relative Risk Aversion in economic models of attitudes towards risk, Talcott Parsons' distinction between "rational" and "nonrational" behavior, and the use of sortition in Spain and Latin America.

3. Comment on whether/how the program contributed to the student's education. What research skills and/or substantive knowledge did the student develop over the course of the summer? How might the experience help the student write an honors thesis or pursue other independent research?

I definitely think M.J.'s work for me exercised her research skills. She tracked down sources, reviewed and summarized literatures, and conducted all of this work under deadlines. I would think this would greatly help M.J. with an honors thesis or similar research project.

4. Discuss any ways in which the program was beneficial to you.

It definitely saved me a lot of time. I frequently encounter ideas or topics in the course of my research that relate to my work, but only loosely. Or I might find a topic that has the potential to inform my work in serious ways, but the investigation of the topic will clearly prove time-consuming, and the payoff is uncertain. (The idea could turn out to be a dud.) Having someone else to handle such topics for me makes it much easier for me to get on with my work.

5. What aspects of the program did you like the most, and what changes would you recommend for next year?

I always like the luncheons, and encourage the SRC to think about other ways that the various projects pursued over the summer could be brought more into dialogue with each other.

6. Would you participate in this program if we offered it again next summer?

Were I still at Stanford, I would definitely participate in the SRC again.

Faculty Evaluation: Michael Tomz

Summer 2010

1. With whom did you work, and what was the title of the research project?

I worked with Alison Roy-Ting on a project about foreign direct investment.

2. Briefly describe the research activities in which the student was involved.

Alison helped complete a large database of cases in which governments nationalized or otherwise expropriated the assets of foreign investors. She verified sources and double-checked the details of cases involving countries around the world over the past 100 years.

Alison also prepared and analyzed a large number of public opinion polls about foreign investment. For this part of the project, Alison learned how to write programs for the Stata statistical software package. She also learned how to estimate statistical models and draw inferences from quantitative data.

3. Comment on whether/how the program contributed to the student's education. What research skills and/or substantive knowledge did the student develop over the course of the summer? How might the experience help the student write an honors thesis or pursue other independent research?

I think the program helped Alison in several ways: by deepening her knowledge of international relations in general and foreign investment in particular; by teaching her new tools, including techniques for database construction and statistical analysis; and by honing her research and communication skills.

4. Discuss any ways in which the program was beneficial to you.

Alison was a huge help to me. We accomplished much more during the summer than I could have accomplished on my own. The program was also beneficial to be because I enjoy teaching, and take pleasure in helping undergraduates become effective social scientists.

5. What aspects of the program did you like the most, and what changes would you recommend for next year?

I liked all aspects of the programs and would not recommend any significant changes for next year.

6. Would you participate in this program if we offered it again next summer?

Yes, absolutely!

Faculty Evaluation: Jonathan Wand

Summer 2010

1. With whom did you work, and what was the title of the research project?

I worked with two students, both part-time:

- Rahul Pandey - Deepa Kannappan

The title of the project:

Causes and Consequences of Incumbency Advantage in a Comparative Perspective

2. Briefly describe the research activities in which the student was involved.

Rahul designed a user interface software package that enabled Deepa to enter in large amounts of data. Specifically, we were tracking the career histories across 15 federal elections in India.

3. Comment on whether/how the program contributed to the student's education. What research skills and/or substantive knowledge did the student develop over the course of the summer? How might the experience help the student write an honors thesis or pursue other independent research?

Both students were tutored in the electoral process of India, and learned through the data collection about the electoral dynamics of politicians. Specific attention was paid to the varying incumbency (dis)advantage, and how this changed with institutional reforms in 1996.

4. Discuss any ways in which the program was beneficial to you.

It would not have been possible to collect this data without the help of SRC and the two students.

5. What aspects of the program did you like the most, and what changes would you recommend for next year?

The SRC in polisci continues to be a high quality, well run program that benefits both students and faculty. The high quality and enthusiastic students is the main draw for me.

6. Would you participate in this program if we offered it again next summer?

Definitely. Thanks again Mike for providing this valuable public good.

Student Evaluation: Aysha Bagchi Summer 2010

1. With whom did you work during the summer?

Rob Reich

2. What were your main responsibilities?

Our central project was to create a database of the 535 politicians in Congress, their spouses, and all the nonprofits they are formally associated with. We also included information on earmarking from politicians on Appropriations and expense breakdowns for some of the nonprofits. I also did theoretical research on the different avenues by which politicians can use the nonprofit sector in corrupt or corrupting ways and our 4-person team is finishing up 2 reports on our work.

3. How valuable was your summer research experience?

Very valuable, especially because Rob worked to make our 4-person team feel like a team doing something important.

4. Do you have any suggestions for improving the program?

I enjoyed the lunches/research presentations. The political science department didn't let research assistants have any coffee from the 1st floor lobby - would have been nice!

5. Would you recommend the program to another student?

Yes.

Student Evaluation: Erin Dexter Summer 2010

1. With whom did you work during the summer?

Professor Scott Sagan, Jane Esberg, Jane Vaynman, Samantha Smith-Eppsteiner (Sam was another SRC student).

2. What were your main responsibilities?

Research covering a variety of topics: -what are the limitations of quantitative studies of nuclear proliferation data? -how do international treaties work? -how is the NPT like or different from other international treaties?

Specific case studies on countries that have explored, pursued, or acquired a nuclear weapons program (and some countries that only seemed like they did): -Argentina -Australia -Brazil -India -Israel -Iraq -Yugoslavia

3. How valuable was your summer research experience?

Extraordinarily so! I strengthened my interest in and knowledge of international legal regimes and nuclear politics. I continue to work for Professor Sagan this quarter on similar projects.

4. Do you have any suggestions for improving the program?

One of the most enjoyable aspects of my summer research project was my fellow SRC student working with Professor Sagan. Though we often had individual assignments, we worked together on several projects. Not only was the joint work more enjoyable than working independently, I believe we produced a higher quality project than either of us would have produced independently. Of course, not all projects are group-oriented -- summarizing articles or creating graphic designs are probably best done independently. But the level of work produced jointly in creating presentations or synthesizing from a large body of research was well worth putting two heads together.

5. Would you recommend the program to another student?

Yes! Connectivity with professors and students with similar interests is always worth recommending. The semi-weekly lunches were a draw as well! Student Evaluation: Matt Guio Summer 2010

1. With whom did you work during the summer?

I worked with Professors David Laitin and Stephen Krasner, under Melissa Lee. Minh Nguyen was my research partner.

2. What were your main responsibilities?

My main responsibilities were to construct a literature review of the topic of governance measurements. I annotated current literature and formatted the information into an easily understandable form. I was also tasked with evaluating current governance measurements and making recommendations for future measurements. I also helped in editing and constructing our final document, which was presented to the APSA.

3. How valuable was your summer research experience?

It was valuable in providing me with an understanding of what social science research is like, and what it takes to produce a professional academic paper. It was also valuable in allowing me a fair amount of liberty to shape my research into measurements I was more interested in. I also valued learning about other research projects in IR and Polisci.

4. Do you have any suggestions for improving the program?

I believe that the program can be improved by more clearly conveying a solid statement of the desired final product, and a more clear explanation of the means to achieving valid research results. More mixing between the econ and pubpol research colleges would be helpful, especially in the form of encouraging students to attend one or the other.

5. Would you recommend the program to another student?

I would recommend the program, on the consideration that they are strongly considering academic research or want to at least explore the option. It was an enjoyable summer and my job was much better than many others that I could have pursued.

Student Evaluation: Andy Hiller Summer 2010

1. With whom did you work during the summer?

Arden Madsen and I both worked for Prof. Jonathan Rodden.

2. What were your main responsibilities?

We used ArcGIS to create maps of all the major metropolitan areas in the US and overlay these maps with key demographic and electoral data.

3. How valuable was your summer research experience?

Very valuable - I'm continuing to work for Prof. Rodden during the school year, so SRC was the basis for my current job; I was also paid to learn how to use ArcGIS, a skill that has landed me another research position during the academic year; and I developed a close working relationship with Prof. Rodden, a graduate student involved in the project, and my fellow research assistant.

4. Do you have any suggestions for improving the program?

The variety of food at the research presentations was better this summer than the year before - even more variation in the future would be nice.

5. Would you recommend the program to another student?

Definitely. Student Evaluation: Katie McKeon Summer 2010

1. With whom did you work during the summer?

Terry Moe and Sarah Anzia.

2. What were your main responsibilities?

Literature review, collecting, organizing and analyzing contribution records for public sector unions to all state campaigns and ballot measures, analyzing data collected by the CPS starting in 1984.

3. How valuable was your summer research experience?

I thought it was very valuable. I learned a lot about how projects are formulated, how much careful research is done to produce even a single paper, and how important each step in the analysis of a topic is in the final outcome.

4. Do you have any suggestions for improving the program?

I thought the lunches and presentations were great, but I thought towards the end of the summer, the professors and grad students tended to monopolize the question and answer period. It also ended up excluding the actual presentor (the student) from displaying his or her knowledge of the subject matter, instead leaving it to the professor to explain some of the more nuanced aspects of the project.

5. Would you recommend the program to another student?

Yes, I definitely would. A great experience and the freedom to make as much out of it as you wanted. Student Evaluation: Miguel Molina Summer 2010

1. With whom did you work during the summer?

I worked with Professor Gary Segura and Elliot Stoller, another undergraduate.

2. What were your main responsibilities?

I was assigned to work on a couple of projects: 1) trying to decipher the role of religion in American politics (the topic that we presented on), and 2) researching the legal status of same-sex marriage in light of the recent Proposition 8 trial. Both projects entailed researching the relevant literature, reading/summarizing that literature, and compiling it in a database by specific topic. Some other work with STATA was also completed.

3. How valuable was your summer research experience?

The research experience was extremely valuable for a number of reasons. First, I got exposed to doing hands-on and cutting-edge research. This proved to be refreshing as I, like other undergraduates, typically only get to study/read what others have discovered. Second, I am in the process of writing a senior honors thesis in a topic related to my summer research experience; thus, the summer research allowed me to hone in on my thesis topic. Third, I polished other important skills, such as how to effectively work in a collaborative atmosphere.

4. Do you have any suggestions for improving the program?

Because our research group was one of the first to present our material to the SRC collective, our delivery consisted mostly of a literature review and some speculation about our results. Ideally, I would have liked to present some concrete results/implications about our research to the other students and faculty.

Yet, presenting early did have its advantage: we received valuable suggestions from other SRC students and faculty that helped us improve our methodology. Thus, I would suggest to have each research group present twice: perhaps a very short presentation at the beginning of the summer that discusses the research plan and a second presentation towards the conclusion of the summer that details the results/implications of the research.

Given the time constraints and the number of participants in SRC, I am unsure of the feasibility of this suggestion, but it may be worth looking into.

5. Would you recommend the program to another student?

I would highly recommend this program to other students, particularly those seeking graduate school in the future. It's also just simply great to work closely with faculty, which is difficult to do in a lecture hall. Student Evaluation: Minh Nguyen Summer 2010

1. With whom did you work during the summer?

David Laitin and Stephen Krasner

2. What were your main responsibilities?

I was charged with gathering the relevant literature on cross-national indicators of governance, which included but were not limited to quality of the bureaucracy, property rights, corruption, and the rule of law. I was asked to look for specific advantages and disadvantages of these measures of governance on issues of validity, reliability, cost to collect, and availability across time and space. Furthermore, in analyzing the scope, conceptualization, measurement, and aggregation of the various data sets I was carefully documenting the way they measure governance.

3. How valuable was your summer research experience?

Throughout the process I was able to receive feedback and comments on my work from Professor Laitin and my graduate student mentor, as well as other members of the task force in charge of producing the report, such as Philip Keefer of the World Bank and Professor Susan Rose-Ackerman of Yale. Such interactions proved to be extremely valuable in the development of my research and analytical skills.

4. Do you have any suggestions for improving the program?

The order that the groups present can be improved. For instance, although we had four people presenting from my group, we had to share the one-hour block with another group. Groups that had only one or two presenters sometimes had the whole hour to themselves, which doesn't make much sense.

5. Would you recommend the program to another student?

Yes. Student Evaluation: Alison Roy-Ting

Summer 2010

1. With whom did you work during the summer?

I worked for Professor Mike Tomz.

2. What were your main responsibilities?

I was initially set to work on a historical database compiled by the previous summer's RA. My job was to verify the sources cited in the database and to double-check a lot of the little details hidden in a database of hundreds of events with hundreds of sources. After working through some of that, I began coding Stata .do files to extract information from public opinion polls. After some preliminary comparison of the results, a graduate student and I began to run regressions to identify possible patterns, and do a broad literature overview to guide our efforts.

3. How valuable was your summer research experience?

My research experience was invaluable to me. I think the job's significance to me was heightened by the fact that I was underqualified for the position. I knew very little when I entered SRC, and so much of summer felt a bit like I was drinking from a firehose, which made for a fantastic learning experience! I was learning new tools almost every day, whether it involved tackling a coding challenge in Stata, or was merely learning to navigate the Law Library.

4. Do you have any suggestions for improving the program?

I don't have a specific suggestion for improving the program, but I really liked the lunches in which the RAs presented their work. It was a wonderful opportunity to get a glimpse of research occurring all across the varied fields of political science and international relations. I was also very encouraged by the faculty presence at these lunches, as it made all the presenters feel their work was meaningful and garnered the interest of leaders in the field. I also believe oral presentation is an essential soft skill, so any additional opportunity to speak before a critical audience is a great learning experience.

5. Would you recommend the program to another student?

I would definitely recommend the program! It's a great opportunity to meet PoliSci/IR faculty and fellow students, to dig deeply into a certain area of research, and learn about a vast variety of research methods directly from a faculty member. I don’t know many other opportunities like it, and I consider myself extremely fortunate to have been a participant.

Undergraduate Program Enhancement Grant Proposal

[note: what follows is the research-related excerpt from Psychology’s full proposal, which integrated requests across several funding programs. -bt]

PSYCHOLOGY Academic Year 2010-11

Objective: The Psychology Department aims to enhance the research experience and training of undergraduate students through the peer advising program, summer research program, honors program, and small grants program. Through the summer research program, we aim to encourage undergraduates to get involved in research early in their undergraduate career in order to explore a number of different areas within the field, to develop skills in an area of special interest, to help them determine whether they want to pursue a career in research, and to prepare them for doing independent research.

Notable program outcomes and/or proposed changes. The structure of the honors program and psychology summer research program remain the same as last year. However, based on student feedback, we are requesting funds for a 50% time graduate teaching assistant (TA) to support the students in the summer research program.

Proposed Research Program Description: 1. Research program goals

Psychology Summer Research Program: We will use the VPUE funds to enable a number of undergraduate majors to engage in challenging and meaningful research with faculty mentors beginning in their sophomore year. This will give them the experience they need to do independent research during their subsequent years in the program. The goals of the summer research program are (a) to identify projects proposed by faculty members that are likely to offer a meaningful research experience in the allotted time and to assure that the student will receive appropriate mentoring and training; (b) to identify student participants who are motivated to do research and match them with projects appropriate to their interests and abilities, (c) to help students determine whether or not they want to pursue a research career, and (d) to hold a "research conference" in August at which each of the students makes a formal presentation to other students and faculty mentors.

2. Research program structure and organization (including, but not limited to, mentoring structure, timeline, program size, planned group activities)

Psychology Summer Research Program: The faculty in the Psychology Department will submit a proposal describing possible projects in their research group and their plan for mentoring students. The proposals will be assessed based on two criteria: (1) the likelihood that the proposed project will allow the student to have a meaningful research experience within the time frame allotted, and (2) the appropriateness of the mentoring proposal and of the mentor, since one important aspect of working with young students is that they receive appropriate training and mentoring in the research process.

Student applications for participation in the Psychology Summer Research program will be solicited via email announcements sent on our department listserve and to those registered in our core courses. Criteria for selection will include: (1) courses completed and final grades, (2) quality of the application’s essay which describes the students' motivation and level of commitment to the research, and (3) appropriateness of the project to the students' stated academic interest. Given the frequency with which students change direction in their undergraduate careers, this third criterion will be less heavily weighted in the decision. The faculty director will oversee the selection process, with help from the Undergraduate Education Committee, and the graduate TA.

Faculty will be held accountable to specific requirements while acting as an advisor to a student in the PsychSummer program. To ensure that faculty are informed of these requirements, they will receive training materials via email prior to the start of the program. Faculty mentors are required to set up an initial meeting with their intern(s) to establish expectations of the internship, to provide an overview of research activities and lab policies, and to review work hours. We also ask that faculty mentors meet with intern(s) periodically to ensure everything is on track and the intern is meeting expectations.

The graduate TA would have responsibilities including but not limited to: (a) supporting the organization and facilitation of the orientation program for summer research assistants, (b) running weekly seminars with invited faculty speakers, (c) assisting students in preparation of posters, (d) partnering with faculty supervisor to assess quality of posters and award a winning poster, and (e) meeting with students following the poster session to assess the program and offer improvements.

Once students are selected they will work with the faculty mentor for 10 weeks in the summer. There will be a research conference at the end of the program, where students will make formal presentations of their research.

3. Plan for faculty and administrative oversight of the program

Psychology Summer Research Program: The faculty director and graduate TA will be responsible for oversight of the program at several levels: First, they will consult with all faculty who are interested in serving as mentors and provide information to mentors about the program. Faculty mentors and research supervisors will receive training materials. Second, during the summer, the faculty director and graduate TA will organize an orientation and gatherings for student interns and mentors aimed at research training and building community. Third, the faculty director and graduate TA will coordinate the research conference in late August.

Student Services staff and the graduate TA will work with interns regarding expectations before they begin the program. Students will also be trained in how to complete a time card and will be required to submit this timecard to Student Services every two weeks tracking their research progress. The timecard must be signed by their faculty mentor to receive credit for the hours logged. The faculty director, graduate TA, and Student Services staff will be available for students if they have any concerns about their summer research experience. The faculty directors in the past have included Professsors Anne Fernald and Jeanne Tsai.

4. Description of the research or scholarly activities in which students will be engaged

Psychology Summer Research Program: Students’ research interests will be matched with suitable research projects among the faculty through an application process. Faculty mentors will guide the students through the research process, providing them with background material to situate the questions being addressed, meeting with the students regularly, providing office/lab space for their work and assuring that the student will be given appropriate safety training where needed. During the summer, students will attend a meeting with other students participating in the program led by the faculty director and/or graduate TA. At the end of the quarter, students will give a formal presentation of their research to the students and faculty mentors.

5. Procedures and requirements for recruitment of students and faculty

Psychology Summer Research Program: We will publicize the research opportunities to sophomores through various means including announcements in our core courses and emails to undergraduates. We will contact all faculty affiliated with the Psychology Department. These colleagues will receive a "Request for Proposals" asking for an outline of possible projects in their research group. Since it is common for undergraduate interns to work closely with a mentor who is a graduate student or postdoctoral researcher, we will give special attention to providing training in mentoring to these individuals.

6. Student product

Psychology Summer Research Program: Students are required to synthesize the research they have been conducting throughout the summer, create a poster, and then present it at the poster session at the end of the summer. This event would give the students an opportunity to share their research and experience with other members of the department and the Stanford community. 7. Plan for program evaluation

Psychology Summer Research Program: The summer research program will be evaluated in two ways. The students will be asked in an interview to describe their experience, which will be used in addition to a written evaluation of their experiences. The faculty mentors will also evaluate the success of the program. We will also track these students to try and determine the lasting effects resulting from this program (e.g., greater likelihood of doing honors).

Budget Notes

In support of our Summer Research Program, the department requests funds for 15 students (receiving a stipend of $14 per hour for 40 hours per week for 10 weeks). We plan to give qualified and prepared students the opportunity to participate in this valuable program, continuing to emphasize the importance of individual student research projects in Psychology under the direction of our department faculty. In addition, we request $1,300 for periodic lunch sessions as well as a poster session and reception at the end of the summer. Both of these events would give the students an opportunity to share their research and experience. We request $1,000 for incidental supplies to support of the individual students’ projects and the cost of poster printing for the research conference in August. Finally, we request funds for a graduate TA to support the summer research interns.

2009-2010 Budget

(iv) Psych-Summer stipends (15 positions x $14/hr for 10 wks—400 hrs) $84,000 Workshops & Final Presentations $1,300 Poster Printing and Incidental Expenses $1,000 Teaching Assistant $3,000 Award for exceptional poster $300

Total $89,600

Stanford Humanities Center Undergraduate Research Assistant Fellowship Grant Request, AY 2010-11

Summary

The Stanford Humanities Center, in addition to its public events and workshops, offers one-year residential fellowships for advanced research that are awarded to Stanford faculty, faculty members from other institutions, and select Stanford graduate students (Geballe fellows). In 2000-2001, the Center began a pilot program of Undergraduate Research Assistant Fellowships to give advanced undergraduates the opportunity to work with Humanities Center faculty fellows on collaborative projects of mutual interest. This program has been very successful, and the Humanities Center considers its undergraduate fellows to be an important part of its research profile.

The main program goal is for Undergraduate Fellows to obtain the project planning and specific research skills that will enable them to design and conduct their own long-term scholarly projects. By the end of their fellowship terms, Undergraduate Fellows gain significant insight into the world of academic research and familiarity with a wide variety of research approaches and terminology—both from their own collaborative work with their mentor and from the opportunity to attend the weekly research presentations by other Humanities Center fellows. Our intention is that undergraduates’ work at the Center form the basis for further humanities scholarship through other grant opportunities, an honors project or thesis, or post-secondary research and study.

A second goal is for the research work to be mutually beneficial for students and faculty. We carefully recruit and select research teams where the interests of the faculty member and undergraduate dovetail in such a way that the research product and process benefit both parties. For faculty fellows, this kind of collaborative research creates a related avenue of inquiry that enhances their understanding of their own current book project or opens up new ideas for future research.

Our third program goal is to contribute to the diversity and vitality of the Humanities Center. The Center creates a community in which the intellectual and social merge, and provides a supportive environment where humanists of diverse ages, academic ranks, and departmental and institutional affiliations contribute to and learn from one another’s work. The undergraduate fellows are an important part of the diversity and energy of the Center, and they often approach scholarly research from an interdisciplinary perspective, integrating concepts, ideas and approaches from their classes both within and outside their majors. This is perhaps best exemplified in the annual spring research symposium, an opportunity for the Undergraduates to present a talk similar to the weekly research presentations made throughout the year by faculty and Geballe fellows. The symposium enables the undergraduate fellows to summarize and reflect on the research they have been pursuing and serves as a collegial format for receiving feedback on their work.

Our goals for the Undergraduate Research Assistant Fellows program align very closely with our mission as a research center: to widen the role of the humanities in society through direct support of interdisciplinary humanistic research and education.

In recent years the program has expanded, and in 2007-2008 the program was able to sponsor the highest number of undergraduate fellows to date – offering eight fellowships. Taking into the consideration the current financial situation, the Center is requesting funds to sponsor five undergraduate fellowships for 2010-11. With the goal of enabling as many students as possible to benefit from these fellowships, the Center will also be requesting financial support only for the student stipends and a small amount to host the end-of-year symposium. We will not be requesting, as in some prior years, any subsidy for the undergraduate students to attend daily lunches at the Center or any funds for office or other supplies used during the fellowship year. The Center will absorb the expense of lunches and materials. As a result, our total funding request for academic year 2010-11 is $21,500. The line item budget is included at the end of the proposal.

Geballe fellowships are awarded to doctoral students whose work is of the highest distinction, and the Center carefully reviews any potential Geballe fellowship proposals to ensure that it will be a good match for both parties. Only undergraduates in their senior year may work with Geballe fellows, and priority is given to projects involving the Center’s external and internal faculty fellows.

Renewal

The undergraduate fellows program has included more than forty student and faculty research pairings since it began in 2000-2001. Each quarter Undergraduate Fellows and mentors independently write short reports covering:

a) Progress of the research project (including the specific tasks and work completed, and any significant changes to the research plan) b) The effectiveness of the collaboration (how often the team is meeting, the amount of time spent on the project, and specific problems/challenges encountered during the quarter) c) The Humanities Center environment (for Undergraduate Fellows we ask about ease of access to Center resources, what resources they are using, and their comfort level interacting with faculty and graduate student fellows).

These reports are promptly reviewed to allow quick identification and troubleshooting of problems by the Humanities Center staff overseeing the program. Based on these reports, the Humanities Center can evaluate the success of the mentoring program.

Recent participants are listed below.

Student and Faculty Participants, 2009-10

Anuk Arudpragasm Year: Senior Major: Philosophy Project: The Metaphysics of Meaning: Inferentialism, Holism, and Analyticity Working with: Rebecca Greene (Geballe fellow, Linguistics, Stanford University)

Alexandra Clark Year: Sophomore Major: Drama Project: Detective Work: Research for Writing Working with: Gwyneth Lewis (external fellow)

Alex Fialho Year: Junior Major: Art History Project: Sprouting Resistance: Queer Ecology and Public Art in New York City Working with: Mark Feldman (PWR, Stanford, 1 quarter)

Beatrice Gordon Year: Senior Major: English and Environmental History Project: The Function of Land as Private Property within the Democratic State Working with: Lael Weis (Geballe fellow, Philosophy and Law, Stanford)

Gerald Hanono Year: Sophomore Major: Urban Studies Project: Land Use in the Suburban Context: Privatized Public Spaces Working with: Mark Feldman (PWR, Stanford, 1 quarter)

Katie Martinez Year: Senior Major: Urban Studies Project: The Impact of Citizen Participation on the Urban Planning Process Working with: Mark Feldman (PWR, Stanford, 1 quarter)

Student and Faculty Participants, 2008 - 09

Blair Foley Year: Senior Major: Music Composition Project: Altered Notation in Non-Linear Time Working with: Brian Ferneyhough (Music, Stanford University)

Carlos Fonseca Year: Senior Major: Comparative Literature Project: The History and Significance of the ‘Spatial Turn’ Working with: Yair Mintzker, Geballe Fellow (History, Stanford University)

Hannah Krakauer Year: Junior Majors: Philosophy and Religious Studies Project: Examining Voltaire’s Correspondence Working with: Dan Edelstein (French and Italian, Stanford University)

Eric Messinger Year: Junior Major: Comparative Literature Project: Philosophy and Literature Working with: Joshua Landy (French and Italian, Stanford University)

Andre Zollinger Year: Sophomore Major: International Relations Project: Understanding Musical Globalization in Rede Globo Working with: Jason Stanyek (Music, New York University)

Evaluation of Program Structure and Administration

Based on the quarterly reports submitted by program participants, the Humanities Center evaluates the success of the mentoring program. Challenges we have addressed successfully in recent years include: helping research teams substantially revise project plans (due to unforeseen factors such as student illness), overcoming student fear of public speaking for research presentations, streamlining administrative procedures, giving additional support and direction to collaborations between Undergraduate Fellows and non-Stanford faculty, and facilitating strong research matches.

Research Program Description

This fellowship program brings undergraduate students to the intellectual life of the Humanities Center. Undergraduates benefit from full access to the Center’s resources and participation in Center events, in addition to the rare opportunity to engage with the weekly research presentations made by each fellow at the Center.

Undergraduate fellows spend up to a full academic year working on collaborative research projects with a faculty or Geballe fellow at the Center serving as a mentor. Fellowship awards are made to students who wish to work closely with a sponsoring fellow and who are interested in fostering connections between the Humanities Center and the undergraduate community at Stanford. These fellowships are awarded and renewed on a quarterly basis throughout the academic year, on the mutual agreement of the sponsoring fellow and the student.

Faculty or Geballe fellows contribute to the collaboration by offering mentorship: they guide students in conceptualizing a research question and developing strategies to answer it, providing feedback along the way on how to identify and evaluate sources of information. The Undergraduate Fellows contribute actual hands-on research work. They read, analyze, write, undertake library or archival research, interview, compile, present, edit, and evaluate.

Upper-division undergraduates majoring in humanities departments and students currently conducting independent research beyond their course requirements are given priority in the selection process. However, the program can also include majors from any department so long as the student is working on a humanities-related project.

The program is overseen by the Center’s associate director and supported by the Center’s fellowship program manager. The program is advertised on campus, and interested students review the list of incoming fellows (available online at the Humanities Center website) and contact the fellow directly to set up a meeting and discuss the proposed collaboration. If the fellow is available to participate, the pair jointly submit an application.

Student Products

The kinds of scholarly activities that Undergraduate Fellows are regularly engaged in include archival research work in Stanford libraries; textual analysis of literary works; writing summaries of or annotations for historical and literary texts; preparing bibliographic essays; doing analyses and evaluation of philosophical arguments; statistical analysis; linguistic analysis; content surveys of spans of magazines and other periodicals; review and evaluation of legal and government documents; creating bibliographies on particular topics; scholarly indexing and fact-checking.

Since the research project of each Undergraduate Fellow relates specifically to their academic interests, the subject knowledge and research skills acquired through this fellowship directly benefit their educational program. The Humanities Center research experience prepares and motivates younger students to take on truly independent research through departmental honors programs and undergraduate research grants (sophomores and juniors in this program frequently develop an honors thesis topic during their fellowship year). For upper-division students already conducting independent research, the program helps to develop skills to refine and successfully complete their honors or other independent research projects.

Each spring, the undergraduates present their research at the Undergraduate Fellows Research Symposium. This is an opportunity for the Undergraduates to present a talk similar to the weekly research presentations made throughout the year by faculty and Geballe fellows. The undergraduate mentors, other Center fellows, Center staff, and invited guests attend this annual event. This symposium presents the opportunity for the undergraduate fellows to summarize and reflect on the research the have been pursuing. It also serves as a collegial format for receiving questions and feedback on the work, and as an opportunity to gather experience in crafting interesting and original public presentations.

Relation to Students’ Educational Program

The main program goal is for Undergraduate Fellows to obtain the project planning and specific research skills that will enable them to design and conduct their own long-term scholarly projects. By the end of their fellowship terms, Undergraduate Fellows gain significant insight into the world of academic research and familiarity with a wide variety of research approaches and terminology – both from their own collaborative work with their faculty mentor and from attending the weekly research presentations by other Humanities Center fellows. Our intention is that undergraduates’ work at the Center form the basis for further humanities scholarship through other grant opportunities, an honors project or thesis, or post-secondary research and study.

Line-Item Budget

1) Student Stipends = $21,000

$1,400 x 5 undergraduate fellows x 3 quarters

($1400 = $14 x 10 hours per week x 10 weeks)

2) Research symposium = $500

For catering, invitations, and supplies for the annual end-of-year presentations.

3) Student Lunch subsidies = $0

4) Additional supplies = $0

Total: $21,500 SOCIOLOGY RESEARCH PROGRAM GOALS: In 2009-2010, the Sociology Department used VPUE funds to hire 38 undergraduate researchers to work on more than a dozen different research projects. The variety of majors represented (13) demonstrates the wide appeal that Sociology projects have to the broader undergraduate population and presents an excellent opportunity to introduce students of all backgrounds to social science research. Each student received hands-on experience while acquiring important research training and skills. The Sociology Department has been extremely pleased with our experience with departmental VPUE funding and we look forward to continuing to provide undergraduate research opportunities with great enthusiasm. With VPUE support for the projects described below, more than half of the Sociology department faculty will be directly engaged in doing research with Stanford undergraduates.

In the Budget for 2010-2011: Our proposed budget is increased in 2010-2011 over what was awarded last year because we have new faculty, and new projects. Our department hired two new assistant professors for 2010-2011, Cristobal Young and Corey Fields, and both of these new professors are excited to work with Stanford undergraduates, and their new projects are described below. Assistant Professor Tomas Jimenez enjoyed working with Stanford undergraduates so much last year, that he has added a second project. Susan Olzak, a veteran researcher, and a renowned teacher and mentor, is expanding her research project to accommodate the students she has already trained along with new student researchers.

This proposal requests funding to support undergraduate participation on a variety of directed research projects. There are four primary goals that motivate us to apply for these research funds:

A. The acquisition of research skills – Training in research methods is a central curricular component of the Sociology major. Participation in a research project reinforces and extends the concepts taught in the classroom. Although the majority of our majors will not become research sociologists, many of them do pursue careers in which research skills are an asset.

B. Advising and mentoring – The faculty who direct research projects commit to act as informal advisers and mentors. In addition to training students in research methods, participating faculty provide informal advice regarding course selection, career options, and may work with students to develop an honors thesis.

C. Senior Honors Thesis – A growing percentage of our majors undertake a senior honors thesis. We believe that this trend is a direct outcome of establishing a regular program of undergraduate research opportunities. In particular, we encourage our juniors to participate in research with the hope that this experience will act as a springboard to a thesis project.

D. Building an Undergraduate Research Community- New in 2009-2010, the sociology department initiated a program to bring together undergraduate researchers from across our various projects, to learn from and share research experiences with each other. During 2009-10, the Department of Sociology instituted a number of undergraduate research conferences in which all undergraduates presented their research findings and discussed the “big picture” in terms of how they saw their role in producing original research. These highly successful events will be expanded in 2010-11 by including a major “Undergraduate Research in Sociology” conference, where students will take the lead in discussing how each of their research agendas fits into cutting edge research questions in contemporary sociology.

PLAN FOR FACULTY AND ADMINISTRATIVE OVERSIGHT: Administrative responsibility for the proposed program will be jointly exercised by the following: (a) Andrew Walder, Department Chair; (b) Michael Rosenfeld, Director, Director of Undergraduate Studies; and (c) Lisa Ewan, Administrative Services Manager.

2009-2010 RESEARCH PROJECTS: The following research projects will hire undergraduate research assistants:

1. Social Adaptations of Lymphoma Patients through the Life course. (Faculty Leader: Karen Cook)

DESCRIPTION: With the increasing number of transplant survivors, a growing interest has focused in the frequency and severity of psychosocial sequelae. Our goal is to explore the patterns of social adaptation of transplant recipients at various stages of their lives. Qualitative data from in-depth interviews will guide our understanding of what cancer means to patients and how patients perceive its effects on their careers and relationships.

Responsibilities: Undergraduate research assistants will assist in developing an interview schedule and transcribing the interviews, among other things related to the completion of this study. Professor Cook will meet bi-weekly with these research assistants, along with the graduate students and post-docs also working on this project. In these meetings, they will discuss research design and methods, especially as they relate to mixed-methods studies.

2. Project Title: Transitions in Modes of Exchange. (Faculty Leader: Karen Cook)

Description: This is a continuing project that examines transitions in modes of exchange. Online business exchange has a high failure rate (60%) because many businesses preferred the security of long-term relations of exchange such as those that had been created in more traditional economic markets. We examine how these transitions impact phenomena such as uncertainty, risk management, trust, decision-making, affect, cohesion, and solidarity.

Responsibilities: Undergraduate research assistants will assist in recruiting and scheduling subjects, putting subjects through the experiment, coding and entering data into statistical software, among other things related to the completion of this study. Professor Cook will meet bi-weekly with these research assistants, along with the graduate students and post-docs also working on this project. In these meetings, they will discuss research design and methods, especially as they relate to experimental studies.

3. Project Title: Can legal mandates and organizational policy reduce the caretaker penalty? (Faculty Leader: Shelley Correll)

Description: Recent research has documented significant workplace penalties for motherhood. This project will investigate whether legal protections for leave takers can change normative judgments about mothers and leave takers. Using experimental procedures, the project will compare evaluations of workers’ files across three conditions: 1) situations in which the law prohibits the expected discrimination, 2) situations in which a company’s voluntary policy prohibits the expected discrimination, and 3) situations in which no policy, legal or voluntary, is in place.

Responsibilities: RAs will run experimental sessions, assist with scheduling and data entry, and will be involved in the design of experimental materials and procedures. Correll will meet bi- weekly the research team to discuss research design and methods and solicit input from team members.

4. Project Title: Accounting for Status. (Faculty Leaders: Shelley Correll and Cecilia Ridgeway)

Description: This project seeks to understand how accountability in decision-making influences the preferences of decision-makers. When we have to explain our decisions to others, does this cause us to move away from our own personal preferences and towards those that we think will be consistent with the preferences of others? We rely on two different laboratory experiments to answer these questions: 1) a consumer decision experiment involving chocolate preferences; and 2) a hiring experiment.

Responsibilities: RAs will run experimental sessions, assist with scheduling and data entry, and will be involved in the design of experimental materials and procedures. Correll and Ridgeway will meet bi-weekly the research team to discuss research design and methods and solicit input from team members.

5. Project Title: Immigration and US History High School Text books. (Faculty Leader: Tomas Jimenez)

Description: This project will examine how US history high school textbooks from 1930 - 2008 have discussed immigration as part of the American national narrative. The US is a self- described "nation of immigrants," but we have limited sociological understanding of how this self-description has developed over time. US history textbooks are concrete instantiations of the American national narrative and are a perfect source of data for understanding how the "nation of immigrants" came about.

Responsibilities: An RA will locate, scan, and code relevant portions of text from high school US history textbooks and will also be involved in the preliminary analysis of these texts. Jimenez will meet with the RA bi-weekly to discuss progress on the project, and to map out the broad trends in portrayal of immigrants and immigration in the texts.

6. Assimilation and the US Host Society (Faculty Leader: Tomas Jimenez) Description: The study examines how host-society individuals (people who are US-born of US- born parents) adjust to and make sense of a context that is increasingly defined by immigrants. Field research for the project is based in three communities in Silicon Valley: East Palo Alto, Cupertino, and Berryessa (a section of San Jose). Part of the project involves gathering historical information on the Silicon Valley related to economic development, ethnoracial change, and population growth.

Responsibilities: A VPUE student will gather historical sources and author a brief paper that traces these dimensions of Silicon Valley history. The short paper will form the basis for a background chapter included in a book that Professor Jiménez will author on the host society in the Silicon Valley. The student will work closely with Professor Jiménez to develop the paper, and receive full acknowledgement of her/his efforts in the eventual book.

7. Project Title: The Civic Effects of a District Transfer Program. (Faculty Leader: Doug McAdam)

Description – To settle a 1970s desegregation lawsuit, several majority white school districts agreed to accept 280 transfer students a year by lottery from the then overwhelmingly black Ravenswood School District. Although the program has been in place for a quarter of a century, no one has done a systematic assessment of the impact of the program on a range of educational and social outcomes. In this piece of a much larger project, we aim to assess the civic effects of the program. Using survey and interview data, we will compare the civic attitudes and behaviors of current middle and high school transfer students with those students who applied to take part in the program, but were not chosen. Our goal is simple: to find out if the program positively impacts the civic attitudes, knowledge and behavior of the transfer students.

Responsibilities: RAs will assist with the design, pretest and administration of the survey to be distributed to the transfer and non-transfer students.

8. Project Title: The Impact of Protest on Gay and Lesbian Business Organization. (Faculty Leader: Susan Olzak)

Project Description. This project explores the impact of social protest activity mobilized by both pro- and anti-gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender (LBGT) organizations in a sample of cities in the United States, 1989-2007. Recent research in sociology and organizations also suggests that the vitality of LBGT communities depend on the nature of organizational resources, numbers of supporters, and the overall political climate in a city or town. Our research contribution will be to link urban political climates, social movement activity, hate crime attacks, to understanding the organizational vitality of an increasingly visible and important community in our urban areas.

Student Tasks. Students will be engaged in collecting information on protest and attacks using online archives of local newspapers to code information on gay and lesbian rights’ protest and anti-gay and lesbian attacks. Students will meet each week, and one student will be designated as the “quality control leader,” and will check others’ work for errors and discrepancies. At least one student has expressed an interest in developing a senior thesis using these data. Students will gain on-hands experience in understanding how hate crimes are reported and how communities react to attacks. Students will also prepare memos at the end of each quarter, summarizing their findings. Several students have been trained on this project, and they have begun by coding high priority city newspapers for the years 1989-2007. Each student will be encouraged to write a final research paper, summarizing their results and linking their findings to the overall goal of the project.

9. Project Title: The Changing Dynamics of Mate/Partner Selection. (Faculty Leader: Michael Rosenfeld)

Description: This project will examine how couples meet, in other words where and when in the life-course people first meet the individuals who will later become their partners and spouses. We will examine how new technologies, such as the Internet, are changing the dating market. The project will gather and analyze two sources of data: 1) narrative descriptions of how 3000 randomly selected Americans met their current partners, and 2) in-depth interviews.

Responsibilities: The undergraduate RA will interview subjects, always together with Professor Rosenfeld. The undergraduate RA will be responsible for transcribing the interviews, and the undergraduate RA, together with professor Rosenfeld, will work on interpreting the interviews.

10. Title: Remembering the Dawsons: The Role of Legal and Legislative Processes in Structuring Collective Memory (Faculty Leader: Corey Fields)

Description: Early in the morning on October 16, 2002, Darnell Brooks broke into the Dawsons’ home in the Oliver neighborhood in Baltimore, MD and started a fire. Angela Dawson, her husband, and five of her children died as a result of the fire. Later, it was discovered that the arson was retaliation for reporting neighborhood drug dealers to the police. Soon after the initial outpouring of grief and outrage, multiple interpretations of the crime (and who its victims were) emerged. The project examines the process through which one interpretation “wins.” This research asks, “How did one narrative come to dominate the telling of the Dawson family story?” Using news accounts, archival documents, and interviews with key actors, the research explores how legislative and bureaucratic processes shape collective memory. Responsibilities: Students involved will collect news accounts and archival documents (speeches, legal documents, legislative reports) related to the Dawson family, and will be supervised in the development and implementation of a coding scheme to analyze the articles. The student will work closely with Professor Fields as he develops an article manuscript, and receive full acknowledgement of his/her efforts in any resulting publications.

11. The Boarding Houses Project (Faculty Leader: Paolo Parigi)

Description: In a period when Washington DC was largely under construction, Congressmen lived together in boarding houses. Using historical directories we coded the living arrangements for each boarding house from the 15th to the 24th Congresses. During the same period, several of the procedures that characterize the functioning of Congress were also developed.

Responsibilities: I am asking funding to hire an undergraduate to look at a set of specific bills that established these procedures, with the goal of testing if living together in boarding houses exerted influence on how Congressmen voted on these bills.

12. The Impact of Unemployment and the Great Recession on Social Institutions (Faculty Advisor: Cristobal Young)

Description: Large scale joblessness can have wide ranging impacts on society, influencing patterns of marriage, divorce, crime, education, immigration, health, charitable giving, and political engagement. This research project will collect current data on how the Great Recession has diffused into many areas of social life. Hospitals are coping with a flood of uninsured patients in emergency rooms. The strained criminal justice system must address higher crime rates. Young people are delaying marriage, but also staying in school longer – with fewer high school drop outs, and more college entrances. Unauthorized immigration has dropped sharply. Military recruitment is up. More people are buying lottery tickets. As in past recessions, rates of suicide, divorce, and child abuse are all likely rising. With detailed data in these areas, this project will offer a comprehensive picture of American society under the pressure of high and prolonged unemployment.

Responsibilities: Students will focus on exploring data sources, searching through newspaper articles, and reports from government offices and social service agencies. The goal will be to collect descriptive data and identify possible data sets that would allow more detailed statistical analysis. For example, the Giving USA Foundation reports that charitable giving has dropped sharply during the recession, especially donations to food banks and homeless shelters. Students will obtain the published data, enter it into a spreadsheet, conduct a basic graphical analysis, and write an interpretive memo. Much student time will also be focused on identifying similar data for other areas such as church attendance, mental health prescriptions, or state-level sales of alcohol and tobacco. The project has inter-disciplinary appeal and should interest students majoring in a variety of fields. Many of the subtopics would be suitable for development into a senior thesis, and the skills they build while researching and writing short memos will help them on their way to an empirical senior thesis project. We will meet bi-weekly

RECRUITMENT OF STUDENTS: Research opportunities will be advertised to undergraduates: 1) via email distribution lists; 2) posting on the Sociology website; 3) announcements and flier distribution in Sociology courses; and 4) at a research opportunities luncheon at which faculty will detail their research projects. Based on past experience, we feel confident that we will be able to accommodate virtually all students who are interested in taking part in this program.

STUDENT ASSIGNMENTS AND DELIVERABLES: The primary student product will be the skills that they master and the work that they complete. Each project will individually coordinate RA assignments and presentations of work to the research team. In fall of 2012, undergraduate RAs who have participated in these projects will present the results of their work to their peers and to the larger Sociology community.

PROGRAM EVALUATIONS: All participating students will be asked to complete a department survey when their work on the project ends and/or the funding period comes to a close. The survey that Sociology administers provides us with information about overall satisfaction and skill acquisition as well as the students’ views about Sociology courses. We have found this to be quite helpful. In addition, students will be asked to complete the VPUE survey which is administered centrally.

Student feedback from 2009-2010 was extremely positive; students all agreed that the skills that they acquired enhanced their major experience or helped them with their own research.

“my analytical skills were further developed. when trying to do a controlled experiment you have to account for why any given variable is the way it is which took great analysis”

“Susan Olzak is one of the best people I've worked with at Stanford. My work with her will have been a key component of my Stanford Experience.” Office of the Vice Provost for Undergraduate Education Spatial History Project

Request for VPUE Departmental Grant for Undergraduate Research

Research Program

The Spatial History Lab is home to a creative community of scholars using spatial and visual analysis to further research in the social sciences and humanities. Our team is comprised of a diverse group of principal investigators, professional staff, research assistants, affiliates, and collaborators. Tenure-line faculty, visiting scholars, and exceptional advanced graduate students working under regular faculty serve as principal investigators who conceive of original inquiries, direct the research agendas, and mentor research assistants. A small team of multi-talented professional staff support this research environment through teaching, mentorship, research direction, and production roles within their areas of technical, management, and research expertise. Undergraduate and post-baccalaureate research assistants form the core of the Lab's creative and productive energy. They collaborate closely with their peers and engage in an interdependent relationship with their PI, where they not only help produce results but are also encouraged to challenge assumptions and develop their own research questions within a project’s scope. Graduate students who participate in our community as lab affiliates make use of the lab’s technology, resources, and staff expertise for their own research as well as advise research assistants, present “tech talks,” and serve on peer review committees. Beyond the physical lab environment we also participate in a number of national and international partnerships and collaborations with fellow scholars. These external scholars frequently visit and expose our students to an even broader multitude of research projects and methods.

Faculty Mentors

Since the Lab’s inception in 2007, Professors Richard White and Zephyr Frank have been key faculty mentors to our undergraduate students and core participants in identifying opportunities to further develop our research assistant program while carrying out the substance of their broader research agendas. In addition to White and Frank’s continued involvement, this year the Lab anticipates inviting additional faculty to join this collaboration. Potential candidates for this role will be indentified through existing partnerships with a Lab PI or staff member; research proposals, data, and skills compatible with spatial history methods; and interests in contributing to the pedagogical and research goals of our community.

Project Objectives & Student Responsibilities

Our processes differ from traditional historical research methods in that our projects are collaborative, our main focus is on visualizations, we use computers, our projects are open-ended, and we have a conceptual focus on space. The Spatial History Lab is playing a part in changing not only how history is studied but also the role that students can play in this transformation. Contrary to a traditional student research experience of data entry or library work, the well-developed Spatial History Lab program engages students in all phases of the spatial history research process – from conceptualization and hypothesis generation, to data acquisition and planning, to analysis and visualization, and to publication and sharing. We believe that equipping this next generation of scholars is best achieved through “learning by doing” where new technical skills like spatial analysis are taught and practiced through collaborative project-based analysis of historical materials. Professional staff educate students in a variety of skills that students typically miss in the Stanford curriculum – from project management to the unique application of technical tools like ArcGIS – while faculty mentors advise the conceptual focuses of the research. The Spatial History Lab is a truly collaborative community of researchers committed to fostering a supportive environment for students and faculty to co-produce high quality scholarship through inquiry, exploration, and experimentation.

Shaping the West

This year, Richard White’s Shaping the West research project will balance completion of resource development with exploration of mediums for publication of narrative and visual products as well as their accompanying data. Data resources supporting White’s research and contributing to a larger scholarly commons will include a digitized version of railroads and their stations in California and surrounding western states and seamless digital map coverage of the same extent using historic USGS topographic quads. This resource development will provide prime opportunities for student research assistants to gain familiarity with primary source data and map libraries, scanning and digitization, database development and organization strategies, and spatial analysis tools in ArcGIS.

Results will then be shared with a variety of audiences through the Project’s website, presentations, and print publication. This year students will have the unique opportunity to inform the future of digital publishing by creating a site to support Professor White’s upcoming book, Railroaded. They will explore existing mediums, imagine how footnotes and other supporting materials might be presented digitally, and create a web framework to prompt a variety of audiences to interact with this information in new ways. Students will gain an appreciation for the potential power of supporting materials, exercise the iterative nature of digital formats, advance skills in the Adobe Creative Suite software, and learn project management skills like outlining expectations, setting deadlines, and communicating with a consulting web development team.

Terrain of History

This year, Zephyr Frank’s Terrain of History research project will complete a series of interactive visualizations for publication in conjunction with Frank’s book manuscript Rio de Janeiro: a social and spatial history. Among the visualizations and maps we plan to create are dynamic views of the property market in Rio de Janeiro during the 1800s, showing, for instance, where real estate activity shifted over time as the city grew in population and wealth. We also intend to create a visualization of the literary map of Rio de Janeiro during this same period: where did protagonists of novels live and work, what were their paths through the space of the city and how did this change over time? In addition to this, the project will develop new data and digital materials related to a collaborative project on the experience of slaves and freedmen in Rio de Janeiro during the nineteenth century. This aspect of the project will be developed by a combination of faculty (including our distinguished visitor, Sidney Chalhoub, UNICAMP, Brazil, in residence with our lab through February 28, 2011), staff, and student researchers. Our results will be presented in academic conferences and workshops throughout the year. Among the presentations now scheduled, we will be visiting UCSB and Rice University in winter quarter as invited speakers, as well as participating in a conference in Santa Fe.

Others

In addition to Shaping the West and Terrain of History, we expect to continue projects underway with collaborators at Stanford in Urban Studies, DLCL, and Political Science. This departmental award would afford us the essential flexibility to pursue new opportunities that arise throughout the year and incorporate additional faculty collaborators and their research. In several cases we anticipate developing a multidisciplinary, shared experience for undergraduates through partnerships between the Lab and an academic department.

Student Recruitment & Selection

In the past our undergraduate researchers have been hired to work directly with a single faculty mentor on a focused research project. Most research assistants in the Lab this fall are returning to projects they worked on in a previous term. Building off of the momentum established during an intensive and highly successful summer program, continuing research assistants already possess project knowledge and are able to “go deeper” with more complex analyses and advanced technical skills.

Future hiring will experiment with inviting new types of research assistants into our community. Instead of only hiring students to learn and apply a variety of beginner skills to a single research project, they may (still under the guidance of a faculty mentor) develop more advanced specialties that can then be applied to multiple projects – such as exercising a technical specialty like developing interactive visualizations with Protovis or writing original web content synthesizing spatial history concepts.

We expect to hire at least 3 to 4 new research assistants in the winter term since several of the Lab’s upperclassmen will be studying abroad or conducting honors thesis research. When possible, we ask that new RAs commit to working in the Lab at least two terms and ideally participate in the summer program. Though new hires require more assistance to learn new technologies and get up to speed with the projects, they also introduce fresh and diverse perspectives to the established projects. Position openings will be advertised on the Spatial History Project website, flyers posted throughout campus, announcements to related list serves, and on Stanford’s Cardinal Careers website. Dependent on the individual PI’s needs, candidates will be evaluated based on research experience, related interests, technical proficiency, disciplinary background, and availability. Interviews with final candidates will help PIs determine who meets not only the required technical or subject proficiencies but would also be a positive addition to our creative, collaborative community.

Student Deliverables

Student products will vary based on the current phase of the research project, but will usually include some if not all of the following:

• Online Publications The Spatial History Project is experimenting with collaborative authorship and dynamic digital presentations of research results. Its online publication section features a journal-like format for visual research articles and their accompanying data. o Ex. Cameron Ormsby’s “Land Speculation in Fresno County: 1860-1891”

• Visualizations In addition to the online publication section of the Spatial History Project website, its Gallery page features several more standalone, static or interactive visualizations developed to explore more specific co-developed hypotheses by the student and PI. o Ex.Terrain of History team’s “The Slave Market in Rio de Janeiro”

• Data Resources All resources developed in the Spatial History Lab are done so with the intention to contribute to the greater scholarly commons through data repository systems like ArcGIS Online and Geocommons. Students not only participate in digitization efforts but also learn the importance of source development practices like authoring metadata.

• Themes Beyond the specific research projects, the Spatial History Lab is encourages its students to consider the broader implications and potential for spatial analysis and visualization in research. A new themes section of the site will provide a place for students to reflect on spatial history concepts like social networks, or the difference between exploratory and demonstrative visualizations.

• Presentations Research assistants are given a variety of opportunities to present to the broader spatial history community – whether to the immediate Lab community or broader reaches like the GIS Special Interest Group at Stanford. Each summer program concludes with a large Lab event where the Stanford community and beyond is invited to see each research assistant present.

Strategies for Mentorship

The Lab’s faculty principal investigators play integral parts in the development of the research project as well as the student experience. Faculty maintain a consistent presence in the Lab and frequently meet with their research assistants one-on-one to develop strategies and discuss specific tasks, and then also each week with their entire research team to brainstorm for larger project issues and ideas. Researchers of all levels enjoy a level playing field in the Lab and are encouraged to challenge assumptions and project inertia. This emphasis is often more challenging for faculty than for students, who quickly develop confidence with their creativity. Our seasoned faculty have learned an artful harmony between providing direction for specific objectives and allowing room for the students to explore and pose their own hypotheses. This has been fruitful in generating significant new findings and empowering students to take more ownership and responsibility for their work.

In addition to faculty PIs, professional staff maintain a continuous presence in the Lab and act as indispensible research team members to provide additional research direction and support these collaborations through project management, troubleshooting, technical guidance, visual design, and brainstorm facilitation. The Lab staff are the lead developers of orientation programs and authors of educational materials that frame the student experience. They also identify opportunities for collaboration among spatial history projects, with graduate students, with geographers at other institutions, with other university centers, and with external organizations related to the research topics.

Outcomes

While it’s not surprising that student involvement helps our projects progress, frequently their fresh perspectives, initiative to venture through uncharted territory, and confidence to question assumptions, lead PIs to reevaluate and even modify their original hypotheses and research agendas. Our faculty are genuinely surprised and delighted at this result, although it is quickly becoming an expected part of our practice.

More tangible outcomes vary depending on the state of the individual project but often include independently or PI-RA coauthored articles, geospatial data sets to contribute to the scholarly commons, and static or dynamic visualizations. This past summer each of the Lab’s six undergraduate research assistants each developed a research question (within the scope of their PI’s project), acquired and created data, conducted advanced visual/spatial/statistical analyses, and ultimately produced an online publication for the Spatial History Project website. These articles, integrating visual and textual components to tell a story or explain a methodology, went through a semi-rigorous peer review process involving fellow undergraduate students, graduate students, PIs, Lab staff, and similar professionals from other campus departments. The results were impressive examples of spatial history scholarship and of the remarkable student potential when equipped with the latest methodologies and closely supported by faculty mentors. Beyond any tangible products, the Lab’s proudest and most telling outcome has been the student experience. At the end of each term, faculty PIs and Lab staff conduct exit interviews with research assistants to learn more about how our program could be adjusted to better meet student needs, expectations, and desires.

Students say they enjoy the tight-knit comradery among student research assistants, faculty, and staff, regardless of individual project assignments and felt comfortable approaching each other for help. Most were surprised and impressed by the presence and availability of their PI, and considered this well above average compared to other research experiences with faculty.

While sometimes inevitably determined by larger deadlines or project phases, students generally feel there is a good mix and balance between technical and conceptual work. In response to past exit interviews indicating that students wanted more opportunities to write and produce visualizations or articles, the Lab created a section of the Spatial History Project website for publications and collaborated with the Hume Writing Center for tutoring and workshops throughout the summer program. We plan to continue connecting with the Writing Center and other on-campus resources to strengthen these important research skills.

Perhaps most encouraging is the students’ enthusiastic credit for Lab programs in developing their skills and confidence to embark on their own research projects. Most of our students complete honors theses, and the Spatial History Lab remains committed to not only planting ideas and skills but also continuing to support their applications even once the student is no longer employed on a faculty project. In several cases relationships that have begun between faculty and students in the Lab have led to other mentorship like honors thesis advising.

While students typically easily surpass technical learning hurdles, they often face challenges in grasping the more conceptual elements of spatial history projects. The Lab plans to address this by balancing out the typically technically heavy orientation program and educational materials with more resources about the individual research topics and theories. This may include activities like a monthly Lab community reading group involving a mix of undergraduate research assistants, faculty, staff, and graduate students.

Budget

The Spatial History Lab requests $67,480 in Student Stipends for the 2011 fiscal year to support seven undergraduate research assistants working 8 to 10 hours per week during the school year and eight working fulltime for ten weeks during the summer. Throughout the year, two students will work with Richard White, two students will work with Zephyr Frank, and the remaining three will work for other faculty principal investigators, including but not limited to Jonathan Rodden (Political Science) and Dan Edelstein (DLCL). The distribution of their effort will be determined by the evolving needs of the projects. Please refer to the attached budget for more detail. We are deeply grateful for the VPUE faculty and departmental grants (previously through the Bill Lane Center for the American West) that have provided critical support for student research in the Spatial History Lab over the last three years. In large part, it is this support that has built the Lab into a student- centric environment. In the coming year, we hope to continue funding students through our well- established models but also hope to expand our program to experiment with positions that are more integrative across projects and expose students to multiple methodologies and bring them in contact with more faculty at Stanford and beyond. For this reason, we are requesting enough support for three RAs during each term that we will pair with projects as they arise. We already anticipate the involvement of Jonathan Rodden and Dan Edelstein as faculty mentors.

• $21,000 Richard White’s 3 RAs for fall, and 2 RAs winter, spring, and summer • $17,920 Zephyr Frank’s 1 RA for fall and 2 RAs for winter, spring, and summer • $28,560 Jonathan Rodden/Dan Edelstein/Other 3 RAs for fall, winter, spring, and summer Estimated expenditures for Spatial History undergraduate research assistants in FY2011.

Term PI Research Assistant Hours Rate Total Emily Brodman 100 $14.00 $1,400.00 Richard White Cameron Ormsby 100 $14.00 $1,400.00 Jess Peterson 100 $14.00 $1,400.00 2010 Zephyr Frank RA 4 80 $14.00 $1,120.00 Jonathan Rodden Andy Hiller 80 $14.00 $1,120.00 FALL TBD RA 6 80 $14.00 $1,120.00 TBD RA 7 80 $14.00 $1,120.00 Fall 2010 Total $8,680.00

Jess Peterson 100 $14.00 $1,400.00 Richard White RA 2 100 $14.00 $1,400.00

2011 RA 3 100 $14.00 $1,400.00 Zephyr Frank RA 4 100 $14.00 $1,400.00 TBD RA 5 100 $14.00 $1,400.00

WINTER TBD RA 6 100 $14.00 $1,400.00 TBD RA 7 100 $14.00 $1,400.00 Winter 2011 $9,800.00

Jess Peterson 100 $14.00 $1,400.00 Richard White RA 2 100 $14.00 $1,400.00 RA 3 100 $14.00 $1,400.00 2011 Zephyr Frank RA 4 100 $14.00 $1,400.00 TBD RA 5 100 $14.00 $1,400.00

SPRING TBD RA 6 100 $14.00 $1,400.00 TBD RA 7 100 $14.00 $1,400.00 Spring 2011 $9,800.00

RA 1 400 $14.00 $5,600.00 Richard White RA 2 400 $14.00 $5,600.00 2011

RA 3 400 $14.00 $5,600.00 Zephyr Frank RA 4 400 $14.00 $5,600.00 TBD RA 6 400 $14.00 $5,600.00

SUMMER TBD RA 7 400 $14.00 $5,600.00 TBD RA 8 400 $14.00 $5,600.00 Summer 2011 $39,200.00

Total Funds Requested for Student Stipends / Wages $67,480.00 VPUE Department Grant REQUEST FOR UNDERGRADUATE SUMMER COLLEGE GRANT FOR THE STATISTICS DEPARTMENT AND THE MATH & COMP SCI PROGRAM 2011

INTRODUCTION

The summer quarter is the busiest quarter in the Statistics Department. Researchers from all over the world congregate. More than three seminars a week are held on a large variety of themes (e.g. special workshops on Monte Carlo Markov methods, phylogenetic trees, random matrix theory and multivariate statistics). In 2009 there was a week long workshop on computational topology statistics and organized jointly with the American Institute for Mathematics and the NSF and held in Palo Alto. We have a special VIGRE-NSF funded program to immerse young minority, women and faculty in a research environment. If the VPUE funds our summer research program we plan also to accept applicants from the leadership alliance program for minorities to offer those students a research level alliance project. Our department has offered research opportunities for undergraduate students during the past few years. In the past years our participants – Georgia Andrews, Michael Hornstein, Brian Liu, Steve Bartz, Adam Kapelner, Arwen Bradley, Hyunseung Kang, Dinah Shender, Mike Asmar, Marcin Mejran, Vivian Chang, Aaron Staple, Dave Shilane, Marti Koeva, Henry Towsner, Shaun Lysen, Michael He, Varick Er- ickson, Becca Loew, Wenqi Shao, Rishi Chopra, Andrea Runyan, John Chakarian, Leonid Pekelis, Alden Timme, and Chanya Punyakumpol – were mostly Mathematical and Computational Science majors. Af- ter graduating, most decided to go to graduate school, and some have already started in very prestigious universities (Chicago, Wharton School, CMU, Stanford, Berkeley). We are extremely proud of having participated in their academic lives. Their interaction with the faculty was extremely fruitful, and many wrote papers and/or showed posters at student conferences such as BCATS. In the Statistics Department we have refreshments every afternoon in the department lounge at 4 p.m. This opportunity for all to come together and visit has prevented our students from feeling isolated. Most faculty members come in every day throughout the summer.

FACULTY Brad Efron (Mathematics and Computational Science Program Statistics Department) Persi Diaconis (Statistics Dept. and Mathematics Dept./ Probabilistic tools, Markov chains, etc.) Susan Holmes (Statistics Dept., M&CS Chair)/ Phylogenetic trees, micro-arrays, bioinformatics, hu- man populations, etc.) Amir Dembo (Statistics and Mathematics) Nancy Zhang (Statistics/ DNA Analysis) Marc Coram (Biostatistics/ Cancer Biology)

1 RESEARCH PROGRAM DESCRIPTION The goal of the program is to develop computational tools for helping biologists to use computational statistics in their research. Tools will include:

1. Applications of computational topology to data analysis

2. Visualization of phylogenetic and family trees and networks and their geometric representation.

3. Dynamic multivariate plots, visualizing annotated networks.

4. Analysis of Micro-array Gene Expression Data.

5. Visualization of brain scan images over time.

6. Bootstrap and permutation tests for multivariate statistics, study of ranking statistics.

STUDENT PROJECTS The students will develop four types of materials:

1. Prototype programs in Java or R.

2. Abstract and poster: these will be prepared for submission to the student competition held every fall at BCATS (Biomedical Computation at Stanford), a Stanford meeting of students and faculty and students interested in Computational Biology.

3. Weekly meetings with individual progress reports.

4. A final report written as a scientific article with a complete description of the data analysis and scientific results.

5. Ten-minute oral presentations at a statistics seminar in mid-August. Students will be instructed in the methods at small workshops organized weekly – these meetings are regularly animated by faculty and graduate students from the Statistics department.

WORK TOWARDS HONORS THESIS After the students have finished their R programs they will have the possibility to optimize their code and enhance the statistics they use through a continuing honors project jointly with the faculty. In particular they will have to develop graphical interfaces that are both easy to use and transparent for a biologist; they will be encouraged to also talk to anthropology or biology faculty about their preferences. The Statistics faculty will help with the development of modern statistical methodology including data mining, multivariate representations, bootstrap and Monte Carlo simulations and excursion computations.

2 STUDENT REQUIREMENTS Students must have taken two classes in statistics and have some programming experience (knowing R, Java or Python would be a plus). We will encourage students already in the Mathematical and Computational sciences major who want to do an honors involving biological applications to apply. However, we will also advertise in biology and anthropology as these students would benefit enormously from this type of program.

BUDGET The program will be for 8 weeks. We anticipate the following expenses for 6 VPUE students. We have secured some supplementary funding from the NSF for 3 other students. a. 6 students, 8 weeks – $6,058 per student. b. 6 lunches with faculty at midterm $160 (funded by VIGRE). c. 4 workshops–graduate student participation $1,600 (funded by VIGRE).

Total: $38,108 of which we are requesting $36,348 from the VPUE office.

Susan Holmes will chair the organization of this summer program. The Statistics Department will take care of the needs of the students for offices and supplies. We have computer support and office space for students on the second floor of Sequoia Hall.

EVALUATION The Statistics department has a web evaluation for the midterm that we will use to adapt the program after the first 4 weeks. The final evaluation will be a detailed questionnaire about the program and students’ comments.

Susan Holmes [email protected] Caroline Gates, Admin. Assoc. [email protected]

3 VPUE Departmental Grant Proposal, 2010-2011 Symbolic Systems Program, 10/13/2010

The Symbolic Systems Program (SSP) requests funding to continue our Summer Internship Program for undergraduate majors in Symbolic Systems for the Summer of 2011.

Summer internships have been an important annual component of our undergraduate program since SSP was founded in 1986. Over the first decade of the program, funds for these internships came from the Center for the Study of Language and Information's founding grant from the System Development Foundation, together with individual grant funds of affiliated faculty and researchers, with research mentors asked to contribute half of the cost for each student. Since then, the centralized funds have been provided out of a VPUE Departmental Grant each year, and we have supported ten or more interns each year through a combination of VPUE funds, research grants held by individual faculty and researchers, and gift funds donated to Symbolic Systems. Forty to fifty percent of our undergraduate majors do one of our summer internships (or one through a related program such as the CS Department's CURIS internships) at some point during their Stanford careers, and most have reported very positive experiences to us.

Program goals and basic organizational structure. The goal of the SSP Summer Internship Program is to meet the needs of both students and faculty for a satisfying and productive research experience during the summer. Projects are defined by faculty with the aim of creating a meaningful and viable research experience for an undergraduate, and students are exposed to the process of research through immersion in a faculty project. Students are encouraged to reflect on their experience from beginning to end, to meet regularly with their supervisors, and to communicate freely about their experience with those who are defining it, including positive reactions as well as anything they are unclear about or are having difficulty with.

Recruitment and selection of faculty mentors. We plan to continue the system that has worked well in the past for funding projects. In late January or early February, messages will be sent to both our faculty and our students, with Academic Council faculty being asked to post project descriptions on our website, and students being asked to (securely) upload their resumes, statements of their interests, and their transcripts. On a “first visibility” date (typically around President's Day in February), students and faculty are able to view each others' data and are thenceforth free to contact one another. Faculty are told how much funding we have from VPUE in total, and are informed that funds will be committed until there are none left. Each regular faculty member may hire one of our undergraduates with full funding provided from our Departmental Grant, or more if the faculty member provides the additional funding, with faculty who have individual grants being encouraged to use their own funds to reduce the needed contribution from VPUE for their interns, until funds are depleted. Faculty get a final message warning them when funding is about to run out, which in the past has usually happened in early to mid Spring Quarter.

Examples of potential projects. The specific projects and mentors for 2011 will not be determined until February, but over this past summer we supported the following student projects (Academic Council and Med-Center Line faculty noted with an asterisk):  Dan Schwartz, '13, "Prototyping Dynamics" (supervisors: Scott Klemmer* and Steven Dow)

 Rachel Lopatin, '11, "Easily Misguided? The Effects of Feedback on Design" (supervisors: Scott Klemmer* and Steven Dow)

 Clayton Mellina, '11, "Reinforcement Learning" (supervisors: Jay McClelland* and Paul Thibodeau)

 Kevin Leung, '11, "A Connectionist Model for Visual Search Strategies and Errors" (supervisors: Jay McClelland* and Cynthia Marie Henderson)

 Jonathon Boyd-Meredith, '12, "The Use of Social Information in A. Burtoni Territory Choice" (supervisors: Russ Fernald* and Julie Desjardins)

 Roseann Cima, '11, "An Advanced HCI Learning Environment for Improving Facial Emotion Recognition in Autistic Individuals" (supervisors: Antonio Hardan* and David C. Wilkins)

 Keary Champi, '12, "Memory Lab" (supervisors: Anthony Wagner* and Alan Gordon)

 Rebecca Chung, '12, "Analyzing Approximate Number Sense Testing" (supervisors: Vinod Menon* and Miriam Rosenberg-Lee)

 Stacey Svetlichnaya, '11, "Innocent Until Proven Guilty? Linguistic Predictors of Verdicts in Court Trials" (supervisors: Chris Potts*, Dan Jurafsky*, and Lera Boroditsky*)

 Daniel Wiesenthal, '10/coterm undergrad, "Trial Research" (supervisors: Chris Potts*, Dan Jurafsky*, and Lera Boroditsky*)

 Tim Moon, '11, "Corpus Studies of Syntactic Variation" (supervisors: Tom Wasow*, John Rickford*, and Caroline Piercy)

Student recruitment, selection, and matching with mentors. The project descriptions become visible to students (and faculty) through our website at the same time that students' profiles become visible to faculty on our website (requiring authentication on both sides). At that point, students and faculty are encouraged to contact each other for interviews, and faculty let us know as soon as they and a student agree to work together. We fund these matches on a first come, first served basis until funds run out, supplementing VPUE funds with our gift and reserve funds. Students and supervisors are offered the chance to do a pre-internship for up to 8 hours/week during the Spring, as an optional add-on to the summer position and at the same hourly rate ($14).

Student obligations. In addition to their work for a supervisor (which is defined by each faculty member for the projects they oversee), each funded summer intern in our program is expected to attend a series of summer lunch events, and to present their work in our Symbolic Systems Forum at the beginning of Autumn Quarter. Students who are away during Autumn Quarter or who have a conflict with the Forum time are asked to send a virtual presentation, either a screencast that can be played at the Forum or slides with a script that can be read in the student intern's absence. We also encourage, but do not require, our summer interns to submit for presentation during the SURPS.

Strategies for providing mentorship. Faculty receive general information about expectations for both students and supervisors prior to the matching process. In addition, for the coming year, we plan to provide each supervisor with a memo prior to an agreed internship, outlining common experiences of interns at Stanford (e.g. not knowing exactly what is expected of them, difficulty fitting into a pre-existing project, not knowing what hours of work are expected or not being able to manage time, and difficulty timing the completion of work by the end of the summer). It will also discuss good practices for mentors (e.g. meeting with each intern at regular intervals, communicating expectations clearly in advance, being clear about expected hours of work and presence in the lab, defining a task that is meaningful for one summer of a student's time, providing feedback to the intern, and helping the intern understand their work in the larger context of future research and career possibilities). The lunch meetings held during the summer provide an opportunity for interns to share their experiences and questions with fellow interns and with the Director and Associate Director, to receive advice, and to meet other supervisors and learn about other interns' projects. The first and third of the three lunch meetings are forums for providing advice appropriate to the beginning and end of the summer, respectively, while the second lunch is generally for both interns and supervisors and is more focused on making research connections across projects. Students are directed to our honors program and opportunities for other academic year research with faculty, and we discuss how undergraduate research fits into either a future academic career or a future career outside of academic research. This year, we will summarize the general advice for interns on handouts that will be sent to all interns. Supervisors are responsible for providing job-specific feedback to their interns, but the Director (Prof. Ken Taylor, Philosophy) and Associate Director (Dr. Todd Davies, Symbolic Systems) are available to mediate and to talk with both students and faculty in the internship program.

Outcomes of past programs and ideas for improvement. Judging from student and faculty feedback that we have received casually, the Summer Internship Program in SSP has been successful for most interns and researchers in achieving its goal of a mutually satisfying research experience. We would like to get more feedback from mentors than in past years, so this year we plan to ask for that in written form at the end of the summer. and will be letting faculty know this early on in the process. In the last couple of years, we have had a harder time finding faculty who were willing and able to spend their own grant funds on undergraduates during the summer. For this reason, we would like to be able to offer full funding to more faculty. Faculty with grant money are typically able to pay the full expense of an intern, so we hope we can make the dollars go furthest by funding some interns in full and letting faculty carry the full burden for others.

Budget. We are requesting funds to support 11 faculty supervisors to hire one student each, which matches the number of students in our program this year (a few of whom were funded by other funds because we did not have sufficient funds from VPUE). We also assume that three interns will want to do pre-internships in the Spring.. Funds for student travel, research expenses, and our community-building events, will be covered from our gift funds or, in the case of student expenses, from faculty-held funds. Total requested funds are $64,960, itemized in the proposed budget as follows:

11 summer interns’ summer stipends (5600/student) = $61,600 3 student pre-interns (1120/student) = $3360 Woods Institute for the Environment Proposal for VPUE Departmental Grants for Undergraduate Research October 13, 2010

Woods Undergraduate Interdisciplinary Research Program (Woods UIR)

Contact Information

Department/Program: Woods Institute for the Environment

Department Chair or Program Director: Buzz Thompson Department Chair or Program Director Email: [email protected] Department Chair or Program Director Title: Professor

Primary Faculty Coordinator: Terry Root Primary Faculty Coordinator Email: [email protected] Primary Faculty Coordinator Title: Other

Primary Administrative Contact: Leigh Johnson Administrator Email: [email protected]

Financial Manager: Kern King Financial Manager Email: [email protected]

Woods Undergraduate Interdisciplinary Research Program (Woods UIR)

Program’s Goals:

The Woods Institute for the Environment (Woods) actively catalyzes interdisciplinary research groups that primarily focus on addressing urgent environmental problems we face today. Woods Undergraduate Interdisciplinary Research (Woods UIR) Program is used specifically to help undergraduates join some of these groups, which will provide paths of inquiry, analysis and discovery for the students through interdisciplinary research. A total of 146 faculty across the university (from all seven schools) are actively involved at Woods, from which 21 Stanford faculty and 11 post doctoral fellows or graduate students provided direct mentoring to 8 undergraduates VPUE‐funded researchers in 2009‐2010.

Woods UIR Program has five primary goals. First, provide students a “hands‐on” interdisciplinary research experience with mentors who model how large real‐ world problems can be scientifically investigated. Second, provide a working and learning environment in which students build the self‐confidence needed for future independent research activities. Third, provide an opportunity for each student to feel a part of his/her mentor’s research group, thereby watching and participating in collaborative interdisciplinary work. Fourth, getting students from around the campus to know a new cohort of like‐thinking peers, with whom they can both learn and teach. Fifth, provide the faculty valuable help for their research projects and “new eyes” through which to view various problems.

Page 1 of 9

Woods Institute for the Environment Proposal for VPUE Departmental Grants for Undergraduate Research October 13, 2010

Basic Organizational Structure:

Woods affiliated faculty, which includes 146 of Stanford’s environmental faculty who come from all seven schools, are asked to submit applications for undergraduate interdisciplinary research opportunities for summer quarter in the 2010‐11 academic year. Ten students will be accepted. Students wishing to initiate a project will need to approach a faculty member who is willing to apply on the student’s behalf. Faculty applications will describe the interdisciplinary research planned, names of the various experts involved in the project with whom the student could interact, tasks the undergraduate will perform, what the student will glean from the work, and qualifications the student needs to possess. Faculty are encouraged to nominate an undergraduate. If they cannot, Woods will assist them in identifying several possible applicants and the faculty mentor will make a selection.

Woods may provide some summer grants at $6.1K ($5.6K + $500 for project materials and supplies), but to spread funding farther during the economic downturn, we will continue the funding practice we established in the pilot year (2008‐09), when Woods encouraged faculty mentors to cost‐share where possible. Woods will negotiate with faculty to cost share on some grants with a Woods/faculty split of $4.5K /$1.1K for full‐time research in the summer, plus up to $500 for materials. This past year, no grant contribution from Woods exceeded $4,650.

Woods’ intent is to have undergraduate research conducted in summer quarter, however Woods will entertain requests for spring quarter funding for faculty who are not able to supervise students over the summer due to their extensive travel commitments. During the academic year quarterly research awards will not exceed $1.9K ($1.4K + $500). Woods will not advertise this opportunity, but will review compelling requests if received. Woods funded several such grants the first year (’08‐’09) and none the second year (’09‐’10).

Students who participate in research projects in either the spring or summer are required to participate in a new spring course, taught by Professor Terry Root, on “interdisciplinary research survival skills”. Students who participate in research projects on campus in the summer are required to attend a weekly seminar, managed and funded jointly by the School of Earth Sciences and Woods Institute for the Environment.

We have strong support from the Woods Institute for the Environment that will provide faculty leadership from Woods Senior Fellow Terry Root and staff support from Leigh Johnson, Program Manager, for administrative help, and Kern King, Operations and Business Manager, for accounting oversight. Additionally Woods will provide $6.1K, one student equivalent, to support the program. Woods faculty

Page 2 of 9

Woods Institute for the Environment Proposal for VPUE Departmental Grants for Undergraduate Research October 13, 2010 will cost share up to $9.9K (nine faculty providing $1.1 in matching funds each). Students will be paid by stipend.

Recruitment Plans and Selection Criteria for Faculty Mentors: After funding approval from VPUE, a request for proposals from faculty will be issued on the Woods’ website and by email to 146 Stanford environmental faculty and department chairs across campus, including the professional schools.

Proposals will be selected based on strong interdisciplinary collaborative research opportunities for undergraduates; strong mentorship throughout the spring and/or summer quarters; the scope of work and responsibility for the student; faculty commitment to integrate the student with colleagues; and Academic Council affiliation. Additionally, Woods will seek research projects from across the University’s five environmental focal areas: climate and energy, land use and conservation, oceans and estuaries, freshwater, and the sustainable built environment.

2009­10 Examples of Specific Project Objectives and Student Responsibilities:

Impacts of Climate on Ecosystems and Chemistry of the Arctic Pacific Environment… According to Kevin Arrigo, Environmental Earth System Science faculty mentor: “Thanks to the availability of VPUE funds, Kate Lowry was able to work for me during the summer and participate in an Arctic research cruise. It was a great learning experience for her and solidified her desire to do PhD level work with my research group.”

According to Kate Lowry, undergraduate: “My research this summer went really well. I was on a polar icebreaker in the Arctic with several members of the Arrigo group, including Kevin Arrigo. During the 40 days at sea, as is typical for research at sea, our whole lab worked to help each other out for our individual and group research projects. I was primarily on a team that filtered seawater for biogeochemical analysis, so I spent about 12 hours a day doing that! Other scientists on the ship from my own group and from a group at Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute helped me to obtain results for species diversity and primary production, which is what I was specifically interested in correlating across this cruise track. My summer experience was extremely rewarding since it allowed me to understand what doing research at sea is like. Another extremely rewarding part of being in the Arctic was seeing polar bears, walruses, seals, and 37 days of straight daylight! Kevin Arrigo was a wonderful mentor for my project as he was there on the ship with me and I saw him every day. He helped to teach me methods for filtering seawater and analyzing chlorophyll content of seawater, as well as provide advice

Page 3 of 9

Woods Institute for the Environment Proposal for VPUE Departmental Grants for Undergraduate Research October 13, 2010

about my project. I am planning to present my research at the ASURPS weekend in the spring and possibly at Woods events.”

Sustainable Grass­fed Livestock and Grassland Ecosystems… According to Evie Danforth, undergraduate: “My research project this summer was definitely a great experience. I loved that I was able to independently investigate an interest that I've had a lot of interest in for some time. I also got to form a closer working relationship with my major advisor, who served as my faculty mentor. I think research is a really important complement to the traditional academic experience at Stanford and something every student should have a chance to complete. I am currently abroad working on a draft of a paper on my findings from the summer. I also hope to incorporate my work into a conference in the works between the Bill Lane Center and Woods Institute about California's rangeland ecosystems.”

According to Professor Richard White, Co‐Director Lane Center for the Study of the North American West: “Evie Danforth's summer research on the history of the livestock industry in the American West and the movement to foster ecologically sustainable livestock production in the region laid the groundwork for a broader research effort at the Bill Lane Center for the American West and the Woods Institute for the Environment. This coming year, Evie's research efforts will contribute to an “Uncommon Dialogue” on Western rangelands and ranching that will bring ranchers, conservationists, and public land managers together with researchers here at Stanford to explore ways that the university can contribute to solving the challenges facing the future of the iconic grasslands of the American West, home to important environmental, cultural, and historical values for our region.”

Student Recruitment and Selection:

Student leaders from across campus will receive a flier about the Undergraduate Interdisciplinary Research RFP to disseminate to their ASSU student groups. Department chairs will also be asked to forward the notice to their communities, and the information will be disseminated in the Woods newsletter and on the Woods website. Faculty will select which student will work with them.

Specific Student Assignments, Deliverables, or Presentation:

Students doing research in either the spring or summer or both are required to take a 1‐credit course Interdisciplinary Research Survival Skills, offered in spring quarter 2011 taught by Professor Root. The course was piloted in 2010 and will be refined for 2011, based upon the recommendations of professional Curriculum

Page 4 of 9

Woods Institute for the Environment Proposal for VPUE Departmental Grants for Undergraduate Research October 13, 2010

Development Consultant, Dr. Nicole Holthuis, PhD Stanford School of Education, who observed and assessed the pilot course offered in spring 2010, with funds from a VPUE Curriculum Development grant. The goal of the course is to provide the students with interdisciplinary research skills and the confidence needed to form the foundation upon which more independent work can be built. Additionally, the course aims to help enhance communications between the students and the members of their research teams

Curriculum includes: understanding differences between multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary research, developing an answerable research question, writing research proposals, giving presentations, providing constructive critical comments, publishing, making the most of a research internship, and facilitating student‐faculty interactions. For the 2011 program, guest speakers from Stanford groups might include representatives from: Woods interdisciplinary faculty; Leopold Leadership Program, an international program managed by Woods which provides leadership and communications training to mid‐career academics; Writing and Rhetoric; Center for Teaching and Learning; School of Education; HAAS; and the VPUE. Additionally, several faculty mentors will explain how they discovered their research interests and expertise.

We will continue our successful collaboration (in its third year in 2011) with the School of Earth Sciences over the summer quarter, which was based on a program the School of Earth Sciences has run for several years. Students funded for summer quarter research projects on campus are required to attend a weekly seminar run and funded jointly by the School of Earth Sciences and Woods Institute for the Environment. In addition to lunchtime discussions with other students, faculty mentors from the Earth Sciences and Woods undergraduate research programs will discuss their research. Faculty will be selected from a broad range of environmental topical areas and academic disciplines. An emphasis on interdisciplinary environmental research will be included.

Students are required to present their research as a short talk , a poster or both at a Woods Advisory Council meeting, a Symposium of Undergraduate Research in Progress (SURP), a professional society program suggested by the faculty mentor, or a Woods reception.

Students and faculty will sign an agreement to meet these requirements. This is done in the Earth Sciences program and their experience has proven that the compliance level increases when such an agreement is signed and formalized.

Page 5 of 9

Woods Institute for the Environment Proposal for VPUE Departmental Grants for Undergraduate Research October 13, 2010

Strategies for Providing Mentorship Including:

Training and Resources Available to New or Inexperienced Mentors… New or Inexperienced Faculty: At the beginning of the spring quarter, mentors met for lunch with Professor Terry Root, and goals were discussed, success stories shared, an overview of the program provided, questions were answered, and concerns addressed. This will be repeated in 2011, as the faculty found it beneficial to hear about the other research projects and mentors so they could leverage those connections and disciplines with their mentees.

Guidance, Resources, and Feedback Available to Students… Mentoring addressing specific research activities will be overseen by each student’s own mentor. Professor Root will meet individually as necessary with students to counsel on problem solving, and if needed will speak with a mentor about next steps and expectations.

The students will meet as a cohort in the “Interdisciplinary Research Survival Skills” class taught spring quarter by Terry Root. Besides having fun learning from each other, these meetings provide a supportive venue where learning how to give and take constructive criticism will be possible.

Additionally students will be encouraged to complete the VPUE survey.

Outcomes of Past Programs and Ideas for Improvement of Student Experiences:

Piloted “Interdisciplinary Research Survival Skills” spring course: During our second year, we eliminated funding for students working in winter and spring quarters and set up the program to serve summer research projects. That decision allowed Terry Root to teach a pilot “Interdisciplinary Research Survival Skills” course, which six of the eight undergraduates took in spring quarter to prepare them to make more of their research experience. Two students did not take the course; one was on a study abroad course, and the other had taken an undergraduate research preparatory course through the School of Earth Sciences the prior year. Professional consultant Dr. Nicole Holthuis, PhD Stanford School of Education, advised Terry Root about the development of the curriculum, attended each class, conducted three mid‐course surveys, gave curricular advice throughout the spring quarter based upon pedagogical methods, and completed a formal evaluation of the pilot program in spring 2010. In addition to Professor Root, five interdisciplinary Stanford faculty participated (separately) in a classroom discussion with the students. The course is open for students outside the Woods VPUE program, and one non‐funded student took the class in 2010 .

Page 6 of 9

Woods Institute for the Environment Proposal for VPUE Departmental Grants for Undergraduate Research October 13, 2010

Eight students received funding during the summer quarter 2010. Faculty mentors included senior faculty, many with joint appointments in Woods. Included were faculty mentors from across campus: Biological Sciences (Steve Palumbi, Peter Vitousek), Civil and Environmental Engineering (Jenna Davis), Communication (Jon Krosnick), Education (Nicole Ardoin), Environmental Earth Systems Sciences (Kevin Arrigo, Page Chamberlain, David Lobell), History (David Kennedy, Richard White), and Statistics (Bala Rajaratnam). Additionally, faculty mentors encouraged undergraduate engagement with collaborators of these lead faculty in Biological Sciences (Fio Michelli, Steve Schneider), Civil and Environmental Engineering (Jeff Koseff, Dick Luthy), Economics (Walter Falcon), Energy Resources Engineering (Lynn Orr), Environmental Earth Systems Science (Roz Naylor), and Law (Buzz Thompson).

To spread funding around during the recession, the amount of money given in summer 2010 was $4.5K (and one $3K) rather than $5.6K per student. Students received stipends. Some faculty mentors were able to cost‐share, which brought their mentees stipends up to or near the limit. The Bill Lane Center for the Study of the North American West, funded an additional $4,500 to allow two students to participate, plus materials expenses. Offering smaller funding commitments allowed additional students to participate in undergraduate interdisciplinary research. Woods did not provide funding for materials or travel. Woods requires that students working overseas purchase emergency evacuation insurance.

Woods is grateful for the extensive advice we received during our second year from the VPUE‐funded Earth Sciences Undergraduate Research Program.

In the summer, several of our students were off campus, and the number on campus was low. We collaborated and cost shared for a second year with Earth Sciences on their well‐established lunchtime seminar. We provided several interdisciplinary speakers from the social sciences, natural sciences, and humanities, funding for several lunches, and a third of a portion for a graduate student stipend. The addition of our students provided critical mass for the program. Again, both Earth Sciences and Woods faculty mentors gave talks, which significantly broadened what the students would have had in either program otherwise.

Improvements… Terry Root will apply for a second year of VPUE Curriculum Development funds to refine the pilot course “Interdisciplinary Research Survival Skills” and will teach the second year of the course in spring quarter 2011. Professor Root requests funding to cover ten students so that there will be a critical mass of students in the spring course. This is a modest increase of two students. Professional consultant, Nicole Holthuis recommends “A few more students and some more heterogeneity in their disciplinary backgrounds would be ideal‐‐would enrich the discussions and the feedback they could provide each other. I think about 12 might be an ideal number

Page 7 of 9

Woods Institute for the Environment Proposal for VPUE Departmental Grants for Undergraduate Research October 13, 2010 so that they all have adequate time for to discuss/present/revise their own projects.”

Cost share… We have strong support from the Woods Institute for the Environment that will provide faculty leadership from Woods Senior Fellow Terry Root and staff support from Leigh Johnson, Program Manager, for administrative help, and Kern King, Operations and Business Manager, for accounting oversight. Additionally, Woods will provide $6.1K, one student equivalent, to support the program. Building upon our funding approach used the last two years, in 2010‐11 Woods will provide summer grants at the full $6.1K by negotiating with faculty to cost share on some grants with a Woods/faculty split of $4.5K /$1.1K for full‐time research in the summer, plus $500 for materials. So Woods faculty will cost share up to $9.9K (nine faculty at $1.1K).

Stanford Organizational Code for Award: 1121478‐9‐AABSQ

Previous VPUE Faculty Grant funding? Yes Off­campus travel? Yes, but we do not use VPUE funds to fund travel Timeframe: From autumn 2010 through summer 2011 Number of previous Student Participants: 8 Academic Year: 2010‐11 Summer: 10

Page 8 of 9

Woods Institute for the Environment Proposal for VPUE Departmental Grants for Undergraduate Research October 13, 2010

Budget Woods - Undergraduate Interdisciplinary Research Requested

Student Stipends (10 students at $5.6K) $56,000 Student Travel 0 Project Materials and Supplies ($500/student for 10 students) $5,000 Other $3,000 (Faculty & student dinner, faculty mentor lunch, shared summer TA, 2-3 lunches for summer course)

Total funds required to run program $64,000

Woods Contribution <$5,600> <500> Cost-sharing from up to 9 of Woods Faculty ($1.1K x 9) <$9.900> Funding requested from VPUE $48,000

Page 9 of 9