Best Practices for Science Education – Reflection

Coming into Grinnell, I really did not think that I would major in any of the sciences, let alone Physics, the one that I avoided the most in high school. To me (or at least me prior to coming to Grinnell), while the theory and concepts seemed interesting, the analytical rigor combined with all of the formulas and derivations seemed far too intimidating. However, with all that in mind, I still decided to enroll in a physics course in my second semester. Despite being an introductory course, the material was pretty tough, and I initially struggled. Be that as it may, working through my initial struggle ultimately made physics more rewarding, as persistence (and tons of textbook problems) allowed me to see and feel real growth, not just in how I understood the material I learned, but also how I approached learning itself.

As a Vivero fellow and digital scholar, my job itself doesn’t have me doing much in the way of solving or deriving physics equations, but I would be lying if I said that my work as a Vivero fellow was unrelated to my experience learning physics. If anything, struggling through physics reshaped how I thought about learning itself. Concepts that once felt overwhelming helped me better understand why certain approaches to teaching can either help or hinder student learning.

Through this project, and working with my super cool project lead, Minna Mahlab (which I’m not just saying because I know she’ll read this), I began to see teaching science as more than just transmitting information. Productive teaching requires careful attention to how students approach new material, such as how concepts are introduced, the role of intrinsic or extrinsic biases, or how space is made for struggle. By working with Minna to explore how science education research is conducted and communicated, I gained a deeper appreciation for the work that goes into shaping effective science education. Beyond the project itself, she was also a source of encouragement and perspective, offering (often snarky, but very useful) guidance that helped me navigate both academic challenges, and aspects of my personal life.

Overall, my experience with this Vivero project allowed me to connect my own personal academic growth with questions about how science is taught and learned by others. It gave me a deeper appreciation for the thought that goes into education, and it has shaped how I approach my own learning moving forward.

Voyant

Since there’s so many different options as to how one can edit, or use tools in Voyant, the initial process of learning how to navigate the tool was certainly more challenging for me compared to learning how to use Gale Digital Scholar Lab (which I’ll call Gale from here on out). Gale’s framework, and the steps one needs to take when using it (build, clean, then analyze) were much more straightforward from the outside looking in. As I previously said in my week 6 reflection when learning Gale for the first time, Gale helps you walk through the process of using it, which I feel makes it more approachable, and a better entry point into text analysis than Voyant for someone who’s just started out using these tools.

That being said, I did find that once I got the hang of using Voyant, I began to really enjoy using the tool, despite still being a little overwhelmed with everything you could do, and all their categories of analyzing text. I would still feel a little hesitant to say that I could 100% help someone use this tool, because there’s so much to learn, and I still need to figure out all of what Voyant is capable of.

March Reflection – Hiring/Interview Process

Overall I really enjoyed helping out with interviewing potential new Vivero fellows. It has only been roughly a year since I myself had my interview, so during the interviews I sat in for, I thought back to when I was in the interviewees shoes and my responses to the the questions that were asked, which if I remember correctly, were the same in 2025 and 2026. I remember liking how my interview was more conversational than confrontational, and I felt that it was the same way with the interviews I sat in for this year. One thing I found interesting was that all of the candidates I helped interview were all in their second or third year (two second-year students, and one third-year student respectively), while I applied to be a Fellow as a first year. As I will be a returning fellow next school year, I wonder how many rising second years will be in my cohort.