A New Perspective on Frontiers of Science

When it comes to Frontiers of Science, there is never a shortage of criticism from CC first-years and their predecessors. Anyone who does not have to take Frontiers might wonder what’s not to like about exploring the exciting possibilities of the design space and the potential for discovering life on extrasolar planets. After all, the lectures are given by those at the forefront of their fields, and much like Lit Hum, the seminars are the perfect settings to discuss the material introduced in lecture. Why, then, has the newest addition to the Core Curriculum left so many CC students with a bad taste in their mouth, which sadly translates into words like “I hate it” and “stupid”?

Surely the amount of time it takes to do the weekly homework cannot compare to the amount of time one must spend reading 500 pages of Thucydides. So perhaps it is more the content of the homework than the length that causes problems. As Frontiers students come from varying scientific backgrounds, some find the homework too hard and struggle to understand lecture concepts each week. However “unfair” one deems this problem to be, it can be solved through personal effort. On the other hand, students who whizzed through physics, chemistry, and biology in high school most likely have a problem in attitude when complaining about Frontiers.

Most students come from high schools where only the standard physics, chemistry, biology, and some of their subcategories are taught. Students taking such classes are typically instructed to follow the textbook in learning concepts and memorizing formulas. Simply due to the fact that Frontiers does not follow a textbook—as most science courses do—makes clear that the course is unique. Rarely would one expect to find such a class anywhere, let alone in high schools. As a result, most students, having memorized precise algorithms for solving specific kinds of problems, come to Columbia with little or no sense of the more general, versatile scientific approach that Frontiers emphasizes.

We are all creatures of habit, and it is unfortunate that sometimes such habits prevent us from exploring new things. Many first-years have criticized Frontiers as a non-scientific course, basing their judgment solely on the science they’ve taken in high school. The influence of past courses has hindered many from appreciating the special merits of Frontiers.

The course aims to familiarize students with the skill set of a scientist: reading graphs, understanding some basic statistics, using proxies, estimating through “back of the envelope” calculations, and defining assumptions, among others. To anyone who has ever stared blankly at a chalkboard covered in integrals and wondered, “When will I ever need to use this stuff?”—Frontiers is the kind of material that one will get practical benefits from. Just as Lit Hum teaches the importance of reading closely and critically, Frontiers teaches you to read numbers and data critically. That way, the next time you see election poll results on CNN, you can judge for yourself the accuracy of the information you’re getting.

“Vague” and “dumb” are words that are often used to describe the course’s group work and homework questions. Vagueness, which can simply be caused by the poor wording of a question, probably refers to the unusual quality of Frontiers as a course that encourages considerable freedom in reasoning. The beauty of Frontiers is that even if two people have different answers to a problem, as long as both of their reasonings are logical and both of their assumptions are defined, they can both be right. One shouldn’t be afraid to think in different ways, especially when dealing with the frontier topics of science. Again, most traditional courses deal with the age-old laws of science. Thus, when solving problems involving these fundamental principles, there is usually only one right answer. Most students are more accustomed to this and consequently, may wrongly accuse Frontiers of being more of a “humanities” course than a “real” science course.

“Dumb,” however, seems to imply that the questions are too easy. But why is there the need to complain if such is the case? Since the course covers topics broadly, it seems likely that the people who accuse Frontiers of being “dumb” have trouble with homework problems because they lack a complete understanding of the concepts. Often when a subject is surveyed broadly, more questions tend to be raised than answered, leading to confusion despite the apparent simplicity of the homework questions. But this shouldn’t be a major problem since one can easily get questions answered through the seminars, office hours, the help room, or even more conveniently, through Google.

Frontiers is not a “joke” as some have said. It is far from an easy four credits. By pushing students to think in new and unfamiliar ways, it is indeed challenging for many. Most of the criticism directed at the course is a result of students’ lack of familiarity with the style of learning and the content covered. Frontiers is constantly changing to accommodate the needs of students and has had a history of self-correction. It is high time students looked at themselves to find the place for improvement.

The author is a Columbia College first-year.