<\/a>recently, the university of california at berkeley announced a change<\/a> to their usual practice of having incoming first-year undergraduates read a common book.\u00a0 this fall, they were asking new students “to return a cotton swab covered in cells collected from their inner cheeks in an effort to introduce them to the emerging field of personalized medicine.”\u00a0 by participating in personal genetic analysis, the students would presumably be more interested in engaging on conversations once on campus about this topic.<\/p>\n
yesterday, inside higher ed<\/em> ran an essay by jane robbins, senior lecturer in organizational leadership here at vanderbilt and one of the cft’s spring 2010 workshop panelists<\/a>, in which she described the discussions that she and her students had about this berkeley initiative in her summer course on corporate and professional ethics.\u00a0 jane unpacks the ethical issues at play in this initiative, and it’s clear from her essay that this story made a great case study for her students.\u00a0 jane writes:<\/p>\n
what do you think about berkeley’s new first-year common experience?\u00a0 also, what do you see as the strengths of case-based teaching<\/a>?<\/p>\n
update: <\/strong>vanderbilt’s commons program has just announced<\/a> its common reading: three cups of tea <\/em>by greg mortenson.\u00a0 no ethically questionable dna project here.<\/p>\n
image: “dna<\/a>” by flickr user king coyote \/ creative commons licensed<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"