|
Compilation of Departmental Questionnaire Responses
Questions Asked: 1) Did your department/program participate in the Area One program preceding IHUM, namely Cultures, Ideas, and Values (CIV)? 2) If yes, how has the creation of the IHUM Program changed the nature of your department's/program's participation? What things, if any, have become better; what things, if any, have become worse? 3) If your departmental/program faculty did not participate in CIV and do participate in IHUM, why are they participating now? Does their participation have anything to do with the structure of IHUM? 4) Does your department/program grant credit toward the major your IHUM course sequence (if you offer one)? Whether you do or do not grant credit, please explain why. 5) Does your department/program regularly derive majors from its IHUM students? in what numbers? 6) Do you feel that students coming from their fall-quarter IHUMs are better prepared for the course sequence in your department/program than they would have been straight out of high school? If so, why? 7) Do you think that IHUM as a whole gives students skills or perspectives which are useful for further study in your field? 8) Has your department/program been required to make any real sacrifices to participate in IHUM? How do these sacrifices weigh against any possible advantages? 9) To what extent have postdoctoral fellows teaching IHUM course(s) been integrated into the intellectual fabric of your department/program? Could this integration be improved, and if so, how? 10) Overall, have you been satisfied with your department's/program's relationship to IHUM? 11) Do you have any other comments that you think would be useful to the IHUM self-study?
Department/Program: African and African American Studies Courses Offered/Faculty Participating in IHUM (if any): none 1. No 2. Not applicable--and same response to the following questions. 3. 4. 5. 6. Hard to tell; we haven't looked at this, specifically, although it might be worth it to do so. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11.
Department/Program: American Studies Courses Offered/Faculty Participating in IHUM (if any): 1. No. 2. 3. 4. No. I don't think there are any sequences in IHUM that have an avowedly American emphasis (or are there?). 5. No 6. God, I hope so, but I don't have any data. 7. Yes. 8. No. 9. n.a. 10. It's non-existent. 11. No
Department/Program: Anthropological Sciences Courses Offered/Faculty Participating in IHUM (if any): None 1. no 2. NA 3. NA 4. NA 5. NA 6. I don't have any real feelings about this. My best guess, in that we really don't have a formal course sequence in our department, comes from my introductory archaeology course. I have seen no general change in abilities in these students in 24 years of teaching; the biggest thing that affects such vision are distribution requirements; when my course qualifies for World Cultures, the average quality of work drops notably, just as the course enrollment greatly increases. 7. I'll honestly say I don't have a clue, given the limited knowledge I have. I'm sure that the program contributes to students' general intellectual development. Not sure how much preparation for dealing with archaeological matter would come from such a course. 8. NA 9. NA 10. NA 11. Not really.
Department/Program: Art and Art History Courses Offered/Faculty Participating in IHUM (if any): The Department of Art and Art History does not participate in this program and therefore cannot respond to the questions presented. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11.
Department/Program: Asian Languages Courses Offered/Faculty Participating in IHUM (if any): Professor X, fall and winter/spring courses If you want to hear, I will be most happy to share with you my understanding of the situation in AL relating to its lack of participation in IHUM. The following is only a very brief reply. 1. No. Some old timers in the department are not aware of any participation. 2. 3. Professor X has been the only faculty member who has been participating in IHUM. He participated in teaching the Fall quarter IHUM course as well as a Chinese track with faculty members in the history department. 4. No. The reason is obvious because we as a department have never offered any IHUM sequence. 5. No. 6. Simply put, not obviously. 7. Intellectually, it may. But judging from my language and culture class, I found only a few students who have taken relevant courses in history and linguistics or are from Hong Kong and China could immediately engage in the discussion on various issues which most students with a western perspective only do not even know how to address. 8. 9. I believe that there has been only one postdoctoral fellow involved in teaching IHUM. This fellow, at the time, just completed his second year of mellon postdoctoral at Stanford and was looking for a job. 10. NO. 11. I want to have a closer relationship with IHUM. I have been trying to get our faculty to offer an IHUM track for the Department. But it is extremely difficult for a host of issues that are too complicated to discuss thoroughly in this brief questionnaire. One obvious reason is that we are greatly understaffed. The university authorities sometimes would fail to take notice of the problems until the situation becomes alarmingly acute. For example, our strength in Japanese studies has been declining with each faculty change over the last four years. Search request was granted only when there was one assistant professor left on staff in the entire field of Japanese literature. On the other hand, the Department is also partially responsible for the low level of participation. Some faculty members who are fit to participate chose not to. Although this situation can be hopefully changed, we are hopeful that we will make two appointments by the end of the current academic year, one in Japanese literature and one in Chinese Literature.
Department/Program: Classics Courses Offered/Faculty Participating in IHUM (if any): [Seven faculty total (four in fall quarter courses; four in two winter/spring sequences)] 1. I believe so – before my time. Certainly McCall, M. Edwards did CIV 2. The flexible & really interesting design (Fall & w/s options) have attracted more faculty who want to try out non-traditional approaches or embed their own work in such courses. This is all for the good. We gain by making classics a visible, interesting option & by showing all its affiliations. 3. I think those who did CIV do participate now, and those few who never did CIV opted out because their fields w/in classics were not CIV material. As above – many more faculty (many new to Stanford) now join in. 4. We should – I believe have ad hominem/feminam. What we need to do now is regularize this & make it obvious in our Bulletin copy. 5. Hard to tell. Majors & minors crop up who have taken a classics IHUM – but we suspect they self-selected those already in 1st year because they had intended to do classics. We also get a number from other non-classics IHUMs. 6. As [in my Faculty Questionnaire] – the Fall quarter, to my mind, opens their minds, destabilizes them, catches interest & makes them ready for anything – which is ideal & shd. continue. They see that humanities is not about tests (only) as opposed to life. 7. Our IHUM sequences give basic chronology, perspectives, methods & info. Other IHUM? I suspect that most inculcate some ability to ready more critically & analyze evidence w/more sophistication: therefore they do prep people for classics (lit/hist/archaeol). 8. Here’s the rub-by giving 7 people per year to IHUM, we scant Freshmen/Soph seminars and consequently have been threatened w/loss of a billet which was given on the assumption we would staff 4-5 F/S courses per year…. 9. It has happened informally. As chair this year I formalized it by (1) getting IHUM fellows to come to workshops (Mellon Hum Ctr) & (2) putting all on Friends of Classics email list. Small steps – I’m sure we could do more. 10. Yes – there are some really minor complaints (e.g. Xerox costs! IHUM should pay all quarters….) But in general it’s enabled us to expand our thinking and outreach considerably. The current Hum Ctr 2002-3 dept. workshop (as one sample) arose from the collaboration btw. me + Joy C. in IHUM. 11. See [my Faculty Questionnaire] – One additional: Attention to how one is recruited, success & failure rates in that area, would be instructive.
Department/Program: Center for Comparative Studies in Race and Ethnicity Courses Offered/Faculty Participating in IHUM (if any): None 1. No. We only came into existence in 1996. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Because we are an interdisplinary program that draws its affiliated faculty from other departments, we have not had the faculty resources to mount our own IHUM course. I'm not sure that we will be able to do so in the future. 11.
Department/Program: Cultural and Social Anthropology Courses Offered/Faculty Participating in IHUM (if any): [six faculty total (two in fall courses, four in a winter/spring sequence)] 1. Yes 2. We now teach a 2-quarter [winter-spring] sequence rather than a full year sequence. The principal difference is that we now have students entering our course from a wide range of autumn quarter courses---- hence, they come with quite different I-HUM experiences, attitudes and preparation for our course. [see answer 6 below] One disadvantage of I-HUM in comparison to CIV has been the reduction in the course coordinator allocation. In CIV, one of the TFs was given a lighter discussion section load to enable him/her to coordinate and manage the course, including facilitating communication between the faculty and TFs and students. Now that this is gone, the TFs are under the increased burden of coordinating their sections to produce a coherent, unified course without any section relief. 3. n.a. 4. Yes. We count up to 10 units of I-HUM credits toward the major [this is the same as under CIV] 5. Yes; I don't think we have an accurate count of this. 6. This is difficult to determine. Their experiences in the fall quarter I-HUM are very diverse and so are their attitudes toward this experience. A significant percentage of students are very critical of their fall quarter I-HUM---- they complain about its lack of coherence, integration and coordination. But others have had a positive experience. Whether these varied experiences have made them better prepared for our sequence is impossible to assess. 7. There is so much variation in IHUM courses and sequnces that it is not possible to determine this. 8. In a small department such as ours, staffing a I-HUM sequence---- even for just two-quarters -- every year is a significant commitment; it reduces our flexibility and ability to staff other undergraduate courses, including freshman seminars. 9. In comparison to CIV, the structure of the IHUM Program has made it more difficult to integrate the Teaching Fellows in our department. Because their first quarter is devoted to a number of interdisciplinary autumn quarter courses, the TFs begin their year without contact and involvement with the department faculty. Combined with their heavy teaching load, this tends to initiate a pattern of distance from department events [colloquia, informal dialogue] that is difficult to reverse even when they teach in our sequence in winter and spring quarters. The integration could be improved by, above all, reducing the section load of the TFs. As it now stands, they are stretched so thin that it is difficult for them to take the time to participate in department events. 10. In general, our department has been satisfied with our relationship to I-HUM. We have not been satisfied, however, with the I-HUM policy regarding the rehiring of TFs. In particular, the 3-year limit for TFs is too inflexible and does not take into account the needs of particular departments and the advantages of retaining TFs who have invaluable experience in specific courses. The policy on salaries for TFs who are rehired after their 3 year term expires seems especially unfair. This year, although we were initially told we could not extend the contract of our TFs, I-HUM ended up rehiring two of them because other qualified replacements could not be found. IHUM reduced these TFs' salaries from $41600 to $37,000 despite the fact that they will be teaching in the same tracks they taught last year, with the same responsibilities. It seems unfair that each of them will be receiving $4600 less in salary in comparison to other 3rd year IHUM fellows for doing the same job. The rationale for this appears to be that they are being hired as "replacements"--- but it is unclear who they are replacing. This practice appears to violate the principle of equal pay for equal work and thus reflects badly on Stanford. 11. I think it would be useful to compare student course evaluations of CIV courses with IHUM courses [i.e. the mean and median scores of CIV v IHUM courses; it would also be useful to compare fall quarter IHUM scores with winter and spring IHUM scores]. This could offer very useful information on whether IHUM is an improvement over CIV or vice-versa and how IHUM might be improved.
Department/Program:
German Studies 1. The department
participated in CIV 3. N/A 6. Yes, they do come
better prepared, because during the fall quarter they have gathered experience
in the critical, reflective analysis of texts, images and subject matters. A critical
analysis that no high school I know of can offer. 8. We could certainly use that teaching resources--two courses--elsewhere. Nonetheless we have chosen to stick with IHUM, understanding this "outreach teaching," as part of the teaching mission of the department. 9. I think the integration has been generally cordial but unsubstantial. We're friendly; the may come to department events, but that's about it. More effective integration? an expensive solution would be to allow each of them, say in their second year, to teach a course in the department. But this wouldn’t necessarily make sense, given their interdisciplinary composition. 10. Yes! Very much so.
[Department/Program:
History 1. YES AND IN WESTERN CIV BEFORE THAT. 2. THE QUALITY OF THE STUDENTS (THEIR READING SKILLS AND WORK HABITS) ARRIVING FOR THE WINTER QUARTER COURSE IS QUITE ERRATIC, DEPENDING UPON WHICH FALL QUARTER COURSE THEY HAD BEEN IN. SOME OF OUR FACULTY HAVE SAID THEY WERE "HORRIFIED" BY THIS. THE MANDATE FOR THE FALL QUARTER -- TEACHING THEM TO READ -- IS CLEARLY NOT WORKING. THE YEAR-LONG PROGRAM WE BELIEVE WAS MUCH BETTER. IN THREE QUARTER SEQUENCES WE COULD DEVELOP THE SUBJECT MATTER AS WELL AS THE SKILLS MUCH MORE SUCCESSFULLY THAN OVER THE COURSE OF ONLY 2 QUARTERS. 3. I'LL ANSWER THIS ANYWAY. IN GENERAL, THE NEW STRUCTURE HAS NOT HELPED US RECRUIT FACULTY. WE HAVE USUALLY (IN CIV AND IHUM) HAD MORE THAN ONE SEQUENCE IN THE PROGRAM. THIS YEAR WE ARE DOWN TO ONE, AND NEXT YEAR WE WILL HAVE NONE. IT IS NOT CLEAR WHERE THE NEXT FACULTY TEAM MIGHT COME FROM. WHAT HAS KEPT US PARTICIPATING IS A SENSE OF DUTY TO ENTERING STUDENTS, EVEN IN THE FACE OF A STRUCTURE THAT DOES NOT ENCOURAGE OUR PARTICIPATION 4. WE GRANT CREDIT BECAUSE WE TEACH ONLY COURSES THAT ARE INTELLECTUALLY COHERENT AND DESERVE CREDIT IN THE MAJOR. 5. WE DO NOT KNOW. LAST TIME WE DID AN ANALYSIS, WHICH WAS SEVERAL YEARS AGO, ABOUT 1/2 OF OUR MAJORS HAD TAKEN 1-2-3. 6. DEFINITELY NOT. WE FEEL THEY ARE POORLY PREPARED WHEN THEY ENTER WINTER QUARTER, MORE POORLY THAN THEY WOULD HAVE BEEN BY A QUARTER IN OUR SEQUENCE. POFESSOR X (ONE OF THE FEW FACULTY WHO HAS TAUGHT A SECTION BOTH IN FALL QUARTER CIV AND IN WINTER QUARTER IHUM) SAYS THERE IS NO COMPARISON -- FALL IHUM DOES LITTLE FOR THEIR INTELLECTUAL AND SKILLS DEVELOPMENT. 7. UNKNOWABLE 8. THE FACULTY WHO TEACH IN IHUM HAVE MUCH MORE WORK THAN FOR A REGULAR LECTURE COURSE. FURTHERMORE, OUR FACULTY WHO HAVE TAUGHT IN IHUM HAVE TYPICALLY DONE SO AS AN OVERLOAD TO THEIR DEPARTMENTAL TEACHING RESPONSIBILITIES, AND AS AN ADDITIONAL LECTURE COURSE. SO IHUM PARTICIPATION DEPENDS ON COLLEAGUES' GENEROSITY IN TAKING ON AN OVERLOAD. WHICH IS A SIGNIFICANT IMPEDIMENT TO RECRUITING A NEW PERSON 9. IT USED TO BE THAT WE HIRED THE POSTDOCS, MADE THEM REGULAR VOTING MEMBERS OF THE FACULTY, HOUSED THEM IN OFFICES MIXED IN WITH OUR OWN. THEY WERE AN INTEGRAL PART OF OUR DEPARTMENT, WHICH BENEFITED THEM GREATLY. 10. WE ARE GENERALLY UNHAPPY THAT THE IHUM PROGRAM LACKS ANY INTELLECTUAL PROFILE WHATEVER. A SECOND AREA OF UNHAPPINESS HAS TO DO WITH THE LACK OF CLARITY AS TO WHO IS IN CHARGE -- THE FACULTY MEMBER TEACHING AN IHUM COURSE OR THE ADMINISTRATOR OF THE IHUM PROGRAM. THIS UNCLARITY HAS SURFACED IN SEVERAL POLICY DISPUTES (OVER EXPECTATIONS ABOUT ATHLETES WHO MISS SECTIONS, OVER WHETHER COURSES CAN HOLD DISCUSSION SECTIONS IN THE FIRST WEEK OF THE QUARTER). THERE HAVE BEEN ABRIDGEMENTS OF ACADEMIC FREEDOM. 11.
Department/Program: Interdisciplinary Studies in Humanities Courses offered/Faculty Participating in IHUM (if any): Professors A, B, and C, in three winter/spring sequences 1. Yes, we participated in Culture, Ideas, and Values (CIV). And before that, Western Culture. 2. Improvements: Increased section time for discussion; students offered choices for winter/spring sequences which can improve morale in “required” courses; the Freshman Book Event seems quite successful in drawing IHUM students together around a single event; a dedicated IHUM administrative staff, who work hard to support teaching needs and to create a positive academic environment; and the Teaching Fellows often inject “new” ideas and teaching styles into the courses. --On the other hand, there are facets of IHUM that have posed concerns for our particular Program: --the loss of the opportunity for our advanced Ph.D. students in the Graduate Program of Humanities to teach the sections attached to the main lecture of IHUM; since we feel that our graduate students are perhaps uniquely trained to teach in our Area One sequence, it is the loss of an opportunity for them to gain teaching experience in the Program (other than their one quarter teaching internship) and also the loss of financial support while they are writing their dissertations. Although conducting a national search for the Teaching Fellows is laudable, this personnel change has had a detrimental effect on attracting students to our Graduate Program in Humanities. --the loss of an autumn quarter course has made it virtually impossible for our Program to organize and teach a sequence grounded in intellectual and cultural history from the ancient world to the modern; this was the basis for our CIV courses (and before) for several years, a highly successful sequence that focused on the ancient world in autumn quarter. the medieval and renaissance worlds in winter, and the enlightenment and modern worlds in spring. This provided teaching opportunities for our advanced doctoral students as well as providing a foundation in intellectual and cultural history for undergraduates in any major or for honors study. --the academic preparation of the Teaching Fellows for the sequence in which they teach is at times uneven. Often, the Fellows themselves are reading texts for the first time and some of the texts may not be in their primary fields. This was much less of a problem when our advanced graduate students were teaching in our sequence since most if not all texts that we focused on in intellectual and cultural history had been read in our five graduate seminars in Humanities. Organizing the sequence around a “theme” helps some, of course, to remedy this problem. (But “theme” courses can make it challenging to find sufficient time to contextualize works.) And most likely, faculty don’t have the requisite time to schedule workshops with the Fellows on unfamiliar texts, at least in sufficient depth. We do, however, discuss the assigned texts at our regular teaching staff meetings, including approaches to teaching them that coordinate with the “theme” for our sequence. [3.] 4. No, our degree and honors program requirements are such that IHUM does not fulfill the requirements. We do, however, include the IHUM grades in calculating the GPA in Humanities courses toward the required GPA for admission to our Honors Program. 5. We do derive majors from our IHUM sequence and also students for our Honors Program; I don’t have access to the number of students. We also seem to attract students from the sequences offered by the English Department, which seems reasonable since we have a substantial literary component in our course offerings. 6. Quite likely students are better prepared for the winter-spring sequence, although by then they are second quarter freshmen and have taken other courses as well that have figured in their preparation. But I’m sure the skills they gain from attending lectures, sections, analyzing texts and writing about them, and the feedback from their teaching fellows significantly prepare them for winter quarter IHUM. Students do read fewer texts in autumn, so the increase in winter is often challenging for them. And I believe some autumn courses do not require in-class final exams; students who have not had final exam experience in autumn often feel anxious about the prospect of a final exam in winter and spring quarters and seem unsure about how to prepare for an in-class essay exam. 7. Depending upon the IHUM sequence the student was enrolled in, he or she can gain skills and perspectives in IHUM germane to our Program. Actually, our Program in Interdisciplinary Studies in Humanities seems to be a “next step” after IHUM for some students, given our focus on Humanities from an interdisciplinary perspective, a perception we, of course, value. 8. I have already mentioned in my response to the first question the loss of teaching opportunities for our advanced students in the Graduate Program in Humanities. And also, since we are a Program, we need to recruit faculty to lecture in our IHUM sequence; but we have thus far been able to mount a sequence since the inception of IHUM. I’m sure IHUM is aware of the strain on the resources of departments/programs with the growing number of undergraduate offerings, including undergraduate research opportunities. But we have had a dedicated faculty since the advent of the Western Culture requirement. 9. I’m not aware that the Teaching Fellows have been formally integrated into the “intellectual fabric” of our Program. As a Program, that kind of integration may not be as “natural” as in a department with a full complement of faculty and events. We could give more thought to including the Fellows when we do have Program activities. When one of our former graduate students later is a Teaching Fellow in our IHUM sequence, he or she usually provides a good bridge to our Program for the other Teaching Fellows. And, I also find that the graduate students in our Program who complete a Teaching Internship in one of the Teaching Fellow’s sections often create a productive and collegial relationship with the Fellow. 10. Yes, I believe our overall working relationship with IHUM has been good. Aside from the concerns expressed earlier in the questionnaire. I am not aware of any serious problems. The Teaching Fellows may have other insights about the conduct of the sections, but to my knowledge the overall relationship seems to be working smoothly. 11. At times, I am under the impression that the sections may not be sufficiently incorporating material provided in lecture, that sections may, in some instances, be operating somewhat independently of lecture. This could be a spin-off of the Teaching Fellows’ envisioning their sections as their own “courses” since they receive the grade sheets, etc., and perhaps the IHUM mandate supports this perception of their classes. Also, the course material may not be familiar to the Fellows, and they may then naturally teach to their academic strengths. This isn’t a large problem, but since IHUM provides increased section time (versus CIV), it may be something that IHUM should address in the orientation workshops for the Teaching Fellows (if it isn’t being discussed). And since the relationship between the principal lecturer and the Teaching Fellows isn’t entirely clear, it might be more effective for IHUM to introduce these suggestions during the orientation. But I should add that many of the Fellows are quite knowledgeable about course materials; I have invited several of them to lecture in my IHUM courses on texts that are within their specialized fields, and they have done so quite successfully. I also have found the Fellows to be very pleasant colleagues.
Department/Program: DEPT LINGUISTICS Courses Offered/Faculty Participating in IHUM (if any): N/A 1. NO 2. N/A 3. 4. 5. N/A 6. CAN'T TELL 7. YES - PROBABLY 8. N/A 9. N/A 10. ---- 11. CONSIDER THE RELATION BETWEEN I-HUM AND PARTICIPATION IN FRESHMAN AND SOPHOMORE SEMINARS (E.G., A GOOD SOURCE OF EARLY MAJORS FOR US)
Department/Program: Music Courses Offered/Faculty Participating in IHUM (if any): [two faculty in fall courses] 1. Not as far as I'm aware, apart from on a visiting basis. (I recall doing a lecture on Beethoven, for example, and another on Schoenberg.) 2. Doing IHUM means I teach one less course in the Department. This is a problem at a time when we have four unfilled positions. On the other hand, my doing IHUM creates contacts between freshmen and the Dept. of Music that otherwise might not exist. 3. Participation was encouraged by IHUM central, because of the interest in an expanded concept of text. Actual participation occurred through a kind of match-making, aided by IHUM, between faculty members. So far apart from Professor S (three times), Professor T has taught a course (once). 4. No. We haven't considered it. There are already many required courses, which obviates offering credit for no-required ones. 5. I don't have any statistics about this. Even so, I know a number of majors (we are a small program) who took my IHUM course because of the music component. 6. Yes. In-depth study of musical works, especially opera, coupled with an introduction to various humanities methodologies is something many students are unlikely to have had during high school. 7. Yes, see previous answer. 8. See question #2. 9. Those with musical interests have integrated themselves in various ways: using the library, attending colloquia, coming to local chapter meetings of the American Musicological Society. If we had more office space, that would improve matters because the fellows could then reside in the department. 10. Yes. I only wish the structure allowed for more contact with the students. 11. See question # 10. I would be interested to know how the fellows feel about serving as teaching assistants. Some don't seem to mind, others do.
Department/Program: Spanish and Portuguese Courses Offered/Faculty Participating in IHUM (if any): one winter/spring course sequence, with Professors G and H 1. yes 2. Better schedule flexibility (one quarter and two quarter); implicit range of acceptable course topics 3. n/a 4. yes 6. Yes; greater range of cultural reference; better prepared to write and debate 7. Very much so 8. no 9. Little Yes Remains to be seen 10. Yes *a particularly rewarding feature was the conversation classes in Spanish offered as an extra each quarter for 1-2 credits 11. Don’t easily abandon or be forced to give up principles that seem to be working better and better
Department/Program: STS Courses Offered/Faculty Participating in IHUM (if any): none 1. yes, quite a few years ago when it was VTSS 2. Our current problem is that we simply don't have the staffing, as an IDP, to offer a regular course in IHUM, though a number of our faculty have and will participate in various IHUM tracks. So the perennial problem for an IDP is how to do this sort of thing. Since the CIV track for STS disappeared well before these changes, I can answer concretely but I supposed the greater flexibility may eventually make it possible for us to offer something, if enough permanent faculty are willing to participate. 3. Not applicable 4. Not applicable (though I think we would if we considered it an appropriate course within the major). 5. Not applicable 6. Not applicable 7. I imagine that it does in ways that are not always immediately evident at the end of their freshmen year, e.g. exposing them to range of topics and approaches to the humanities. 8. Not applicable (or I should say that we have simply found it too difficult to get a course up and running). 9. Not applicable. 10. Since we don't have any formal relationship right now, I guess I'd say not applicable though I have no complaints and appreciate IHUM's interest in getting STS involved. 11.
|
Stanford University, 2003
http://www.stanford.edu/group/vpue/ihumrev