Jan
23
Finally, my love/hate of lab work and my love of Lady Gaga have been merged together into pure awesomeness:
I think the best part is that her costumes are made out of lab supplies!
Props to Dave, my friend and co-blogger over on my science nerd blog, who brought this awesomeness to my attention!
Apr
23
I’m involved in a program where scientists go to elementary schools to teach science to the kids. It’s super fun to see how engaged the students get in the experiments, to see them thinking critically and learning that science is fun. Last week, I went to meet the classes I’m going to be working with this year – grades 3 and 4. I told them a little bit about my background as a scientist and, after wowing them with the fact that I went to school until I was in grade 23, we got to talking about what university is like. I told them that unlike elementary school, where you have classes in all the different subjects – science and math and English and art and gym and music and history, etc. – when you get to university, you start to specialize, you decide what you like and then you take most of your courses just in that area. If you decide you like science, then you can specialize in science and take mostly science classes. If you decide you like art, you can specialize in that. And this one kid’s eyes just go so big and the expression on his faced showed that he’d just had the most amazing revelation. “You mean you can do *anything* you want? You get to pick *anything*?” I think it was the first time he’d ever heard this! “That’s right,” I said,”You can decide to do whatever you want!”
And then today I was talking to one of the students in the university course that I’m teaching, answering some last minute question about tomorrow’s final exam, my student said that even though this is her last term of university, she was really excited by research methods (which is not something you hear very often, by the way. Research methods tends to be something that many students feel they just have to suffer through, something that they won’t ever engage in again). “It’s really exciting,” she said, “with research, you really can do anything you want!”
And isn’t that a nice thought? Whether you are a grade 3 student looking to your life ahead or a fourth year university student whose eyes are being opened to the possibilities of research or [insert your own life here] – you can do *anything* you want!
Apr
1
Fiscal new year, that is. At least if you are on a April 1 to March 31 fiscal year. Which I just so happen to be. So, yeah, today is fiscal new year. Which means that I can no longer blame anything and everything that goes wrong on fiscal year-end, as I am wont to do.
I will now have to resort to blaming things on “the economy” and “my brain injury.1”
1For the record, I’m feeling better today. Still have a bit of a headache, but not as much as yesterday, when I couldn’t even look at a computer screen. I was even able to go to work today, although I had to alternate tasks that required looking at the computer screen with those that didn’t.
Mar
24
I *finally* finished marking the assignments that I’ve been marking for the last 362,454,879 days. Just in time to create the exam before the next set of assignments come in for marking! I really like teaching, but man oh man it’s a lot of work. Especially the first time you teach a course. I can even begin to describe how happy I’ll be to see the end of term!
In related news, I saw over on Derek‘s Facebook wall that it is the 50th anniversary of Strunk and White’s book The Elements of Style. The Elements of Style is a short book about grammar, word usage and composition that pretty much everyone should read. It’s available in its entirety online, for free. I tell all my students, regardless of what course I’m teaching, that they should read it1.
In other related news, I showed this video clip to my class today:
“The The Impotence of Proofreading,” by Taylor Mali
I thought I’d posted this video before, but a quick search of my blog didn’t turn up anything, so perhaps I just meant to2. It makes me laugh every time I watch it.
1I wonder how many of them actually do?
2See: good intentions, road to hell paved with.
Mar
14
Yup, pi. As in ” the ratio of a circle’s area to the square of its radius” [Source: wikipedia]. As in 3.141592…. As in March 14 (3/14). And, now that I think about it, we are only six years away from an even more precise Pi Day: March 14, 2015 (3/14/15) !
This holiest of holy days was recently brought to my attention by my friend, Almost Dr. Dan, who is an Almost Dr. of Statistics and who has tattoos of the Greek letters sigma, psi, delta, gamma, xi, and, of course, pi, on various locations on his body.
According to the Pi Day website:
With the use of computers, Pi has been calculated to over 1 trillion digits past the decimal. Pi is an irrational number meaning it will continue infinitely without repeating. The symbol for pi was first used in 1706 by William Jones, but was popular after it was adopted by the Swiss mathematician Leonhard Euler in 1737.
Also, through the Pi Day website I discovered my new favourite song: Lose Yourself (In the Digits).
And now, a declaration:
In honour of Pi Day, I hereby declare Almost Dr. Dan to be the Official Statisitian and Tattoo Consultant for Not To Be Trusted With Knives.
Mar
9
… or “What I Would Have Tweeted Today Had I Been Near My Computer And/Or Not Afraid To Tweet With My Phone In Case Bell Tries To Charge Me To Do So Despite My Having A Texting Plan As Per This News Story.”
Feb
20
So, yesterday I went to that talk by Dr. El-So-hottie1 that I mentioned the other day. His research in in the area of nutrigenomics – the field that applies genomics (i.e., studying the genome (i.e., all the genes in an individual)) to nutrients. What I really like about his lecture was that he talks about how neither genetics nor environment operate in isolation. We are past the time of talking about nature vs. nurture (although you will still often hear people debating this false dichotomy) and really need to think about how genes and the environment interact with one another.
Sugar
In his talk, he discussed a few of his recent lines of research – specifically, research on sugar and research on coffee. Through a strange anomoly in one study (and then a systematic investigation to what the heck was going on2), he and one of his grad students discovered that a particular variation in one gene (called GLUT-2) resulted in people with that version of the gene eating more sugar. Not in the lab and not under some special diet – just in their every day lives. And it wasn’t that they taste the sugar less than people with the other version of the gene – but that their brains sensed the sugar less, leading them to eat more. Interestingly, people with this version of the GLUT-2 gene have a higher risk of diabetes. And so this research illustrates an interesting point: If you studied these people and just looked at their sugar intake (without looking at their genetic makeup), you would conclude that higher intake of sugar caused (or at least increased their risk of) diabetes. But if you looked at their genetic makeup (i.e., which version of the GLUT-2 gene they had) without looking at their food intake, you would conclude that the version of GLUT-2 they have causes (or at least increases the risk of) diabetes. But when you look at the whole picutre, you see that the relationship is more complex than that. So what increases the risk of diabetes in people with this version of GLUT-2? Maybe that version GLUT-2 has some action in the pancreas that leads to diabetes (as GLUT-2 is in the pancreas as well as the brain and, I believe, other places). Maybe it’s the sugar. That still remains to be determined, as this research is still quite young. But very cool, eh?
Caffeine
His research on caffeine was equally fascinating. There’s lots of conflicting research on whether regular caffeine intake increases risk of heart attacks. Some research says yes, other research says no3. And it appears that the reason behind these conflicting results may be – you guessed it – genetics. There’s a gene related to the body’s ability to break down caffeine – some people break caffeine down quickly (we call them “fast metabolizers”) while other people break down caffeine slowly (not surprisingly, we call them “slow metabolizers”). And if you look at caffeine intake and risk of heart attack while also looking at their genetic status (i.e., fast or slow metabolizers), you find something very interesting: people who are slow metabolizers have an increased risk of having heart attack if they regularly consume even 2 or 3 cups of coffee per day; meanwhile, fast metabolizers do not have an increased risk of heart attack even if they consume 4 cups of coffee per day – what’s more, fast metabolizers who drink 2 or 3 cups of coffee per day actually have a decreased risk of heart attack compared to those who don’t drink any coffee!
So What?
So, all this is pretty freaking cool, but I should point out (as did Dr. El-So-hottie), that this type of research is really in its infancy. Perhaps down the road we’ll be able to scan your genome and tell which diet (or other lifestyle factors) will work for you in particular, but we just aren’t there yet. And we won’t be for some time.
Not that this stops companies from trying to profit by selling you a DNA test, of course.
1Props to my friend Alicia for coming up with that name!
2This reminds me of the Issac Asimov quotation “The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new discoveries, is not ‘Eureka!’ (I’ve found it!), but ‘That’s funny…’
3And yet other research says “wtf? I have no idea, yo.”
Image credits:
Sugar image credit: Uwe Hermann on Flickr.
Coffee image credit: Omar MK on Flickr.
Jan
12
So, for my 1000th blog posting I wanted to do something special. And I decided that the something special would be a “101 things to do in 1001 days” list. The first time I saw one of these was on Dave’s blog and I may or may not have soon after written a parody version called “102 things to do in 1,000,001 days” on a satire blog that may or may not have been removed from the Internet for possible libel issues. Anyway.
The idea behind this list is to come up with 101 things you want to do – things you’ve always meant to do but haven’t gotten around to, things you want to challenge yourself to accomplish and, let’s be honest, a few things that sound good but you are pretty sure you’ll do so that you can gain the satisfaction of checking at least a few things off your list. As well, it’s important that the goals are clearly defined/measurable (or, as we say in the Research Methods world – you need an “operational definition” of each) so that you know whether or not you’ve done it. Props for this idea go to triplux, who appears to be the creator of this idea (or, at least, is the first Google hit for “101 in 1001”).
So, after much thinking and pondering and reflecting and considering and deliberating and contemplating and ruminating and reading the thesaurus, I have come up with the following 101 items that I intend to do in the next 1001 days:
End Date: Monday, October 10, 2011 (thank you dateandtime.com!)
Ya, this one is totally cheating, since I’m already training for another half. But it’s hard to think of 101 things!
Um, ya. I have seven years worth of photos in boxes, waiting for scrapbooking.
Can you believe that, having lived in Vancouver for more than eight years, I’ve not yet skied Whistler?
This one is stolen from an homage to Dave’s 101 things in 1001 days list. He didn’t actually manage to do it, but I think I can. I think I can.
Also stolen from Dave’s list. I’ve been wanting to read something by Rushdie, so here’s an extra push.
This is the last one I’m stealing from Dave’s list. Promise. Also, Dan said I should go there.
Stolen from Triplux.
Which Sarah’s been telling me to read since forever. And which she just gave me for Christmas, so if I fail to accomplish this one, well, that would just be sad.
I always seem to get a course for one term only. I taught Nutritional Assessment last year as a sessional, but the department hired a new prof and he chose that as one of his courses to teach, so I don’t get to teach it this year. And then, this past term I taught another course as a sessional because the usual sessional needed a break from it for one term only, so I probably won’t get to teach it next year. Now I want some consistency!
Just because it would be difficult.
i.e., meet the recommended number of servings for each food group every day and consume no more than one unhealthy “other” food per week.
i.e., ones that I haven’t been to before. Or ones where I’ve only been to their airport/airport hotel (I’m looking at you Texas, Oregon and Arizona), if I actually go to somewhere other than the airport/airport hotel.
since it doesn’t fit in my kitchen. =(
I can’t believe I’ve lived in Vancouver for 8+ years and not once have I been to see Bard on the Beach. I like Shakespeare (I even have a minor in Drama that included a whole course in “Acting Shakespeare”). And I like beaches!
Inspired by the tree at the Mexican resort I stayed at this Christmas.
My 2008 average was 93 readers per day.
Which occurred on Friday, September 26, 2008 as a direct result of my list of the hottest players in the NHL
Which I have partly written and can’t seem to get around to finishing.
I’ve been trying to find a good pair of brown dress pants since forever! Hopefully I’ll find them in the next 1001 days.
Because I really enjoy baking and I never seem to do it anymore.
Nov
14
So, I’ve picked up a new class to teach next term: Research Methods. I am stoked because I *love* research methods. This may or may not be because I’m a nerd.
Thus far, I have two issues with this course. One is trying to find a good text book. As you can see from the photo, I’ve got quite a sampling of books (plus I have a number of other evaluation copies on their way to me). I haven’t reviewed them all in depth yet, but from scanning them, I haven’t found one that gives me what I want. The problem I’m having with a number of them is that they overwhelmingly focus on quantitative methods and barely even touch on qualitative methods. I should clarify here what I mean by “Research Methods,” as I’ve discovered from talking with people, “research methods” means different things to different people. I’m not talking about library research (which was a number of people’s first impressions when I said I was teaching RM); I’m referring to designing scientific and social science research projects – experiments, quasi-experiments, survey research, qualitative interview type research, etc.) It includes things like the philosophy underpinning different research approaches, research ethics, research writing and a bit about analysis of research results (but not super in depth as there is a separate statistics course). I’d been hoping to get a kinesiology methods text (as this is a Kin Research Methods course), but so far the books I’ve seen have really skimped on the qualitative. Like, a 400 page textbook will have 20 pages on qualitative research.
The second issue I’m having is that, while I’m super stoked to be teaching this course because (did I mention?) I love research methods, but everyone keeps telling me that it’s a course no one wants to teach because students don’t like it. I even got a book on “best practices for teaching stats & research methods” and the whole intro was all “Students hate taking research methods. It’s like torture to them!” And I’m all “*gasp*! How could anyone not love methods??” I think methods is super interesting and can be readily made interactive (hello! create a research proposal! hello, critique a research paper! hello, conduct a research project!) and relevant (even if you aren’t going to go to grad school and do research yourself, you need to be able to critically assess research that other people have done to, say, know what the best evidence is for any given situation). And making things interactive and relevant, in my experience, is key to catching students’ interest and helping them learn. But, seriously, I’ve been told by multiple people that students are really resistant to research methods course.
So, I’m putting the question to you, dear blog readers: Have you ever taken a research methods course? If so, what did you think of it? What would you recommend?