Liaisons in French a corpus-based study using morpho-syntactic information

2019年帕森斯设计学院巴黎分校本科申请条件【3】学校名称：美国帕森斯设计学院Parsons The New School for Design所在位置：美国，美国纽约州纽约西12街66号录取率：0.66包括：fStrategic Design and Management战略设计与管理专业Application and Financial Aid DeadlinesApplication Deadlines:Fall Term Early Action Applicants: November 1Fall Term Regular Priority Applicants: January 15Fall Term Transfer Priority Applicants: April 1Spring Term Priority Applicants: October 15申请截止日期秋季学期早期申请人：11月1日秋季学期常规优先申请人：1月15日秋季学期转学优先申请人：4月1日春季优先申请人：10月15日Financial Aid DeadlinesAll applicants admissible into our program are considered for a merit scholarship award that is determined by the strength of their application. Scholarship award notification is communicated at the same time as the admission decision. International students are eligible only for merit scholarships. If you are a U.S. citizen or eligible noncitizen, we encourage you to complete the Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA), which can be found on the Web . The FAFSA is available each year on October 1. (The New School’s federal school code is 002780.) You do not need to wait for an admissiondecision to apply for federal aid; we recommend submitting by our FAFSA priority deadlines:Fall: February 1Spring: November 1财政援助截止日期所有申请人都可以参加我们的课程，并考虑申请奖学金。

202X年帕森斯设计学院巴黎分校本科申请条件202X年帕森斯设计学院在已经设立了巴黎分校，其教育程度并不会逊色于纽约本部，接下来跟着来一起了解一下202X年帕森斯设计学院巴黎分校本科申请条件吧，欢迎阅读。

小科普：Parsons Challenge是什么?>>>BA,BFA,BS,MA,MS,MBA,PHD的全称是什么?【科普帖】答：所有BFA学位，BBA学位和BA / BFA途径申请者必须完成帕森斯挑战并提交给招生委员会。

帕森斯挑战赛的提交只能通过SlideRoom进行。

CD，DVD，幻灯片，原始艺术品，PowerPoint演示文稿，活页夹和闪存驱动器将不被接受。

BFA和BA /BFA申请者：创建一个新的视觉作品，灵感来自作品中提交的作品的主题。

通过写一篇500字的论文来描述你的想法如何发展，从而支持你的过程。

您还可以提交最多两个可视化文件来记录您的流程。

所有形式的媒体都是可以接受的-绘画，录像，摄影，雕塑，3D作品，拼贴和数字图像。

BBA申请者：创建一个由广告，发明或已经创建的作品主题所启发的新视觉作品。

通过写一篇500字的论文来描述你的想法如何发展，从而支持你的过程。

您还可以提交最多两个可视化文件来记录您的流程。

所有形式的媒体都是可以接受的- 绘画，录像，摄影，雕塑，3D作品，拼贴和数字图像。

帕森斯挑战赛有助于招生委员会了解未来的学生如何发展思路，以视觉方式传达这些想法，并以书面形式捍卫作品。

At Parsons Paris, we take your education as seriously as you do. When youapply, we carefully consider your experience, achievements, motivation, andpotential for growth (even if you have limited art or design experience).APPLICATION INSTRUCTIONS BY UNDERGRADUATE PROGRAMReview the complete information for your intended program, as each degreehas particular application requirements. Note that the Parsons Challenge isrequired of all undergraduate applicants.在帕森斯设计学院巴黎分校，我们像您一样认真对待您的教育。

拉康的第六个讨论班英文参考文献标注全文共6篇示例，供读者参考篇1Lacan's Sixth Seminar: Understanding OurselvesIntroductionHello everyone! Today, I want to tell you about an interesting seminar called "Lacan's Sixth Seminar." It's all about understanding ourselves and how we think. So, let's dive into it!What is Lacan's Sixth Seminar?Lacan's Sixth Seminar is a special class where people come together to learn about a famous psychologist named Jacques Lacan. He had many ideas about how our minds work and how we can understand ourselves better. In this seminar, experts discuss his ideas and share their thoughts with others.Why is it Important?Understanding ourselves is super important because it helps us make sense of our thoughts and feelings. Lacan believed that our minds are like puzzles, and if we can solve the puzzle, we canunderstand ourselves better. This seminar teaches us how to solve those puzzles and discover who we really are.What Did Lacan Talk About?During the seminar, Lacan talked about many interesting things. He spoke about the unconscious mind, which is like a hidden part of our brain that affects our thoughts and actions without us even realizing it. Lacan said that by understanding our unconscious mind, we can understand why we do certain things.He also talked about language and how it shapes our thoughts. Have you ever wondered why we use words to communicate? Lacan explained that words have a lot of power and can influence the way we think about ourselves and the world around us.How Can We Apply Lacan's Ideas?Lacan's ideas can be applied in many areas of our lives. For example, by understanding our unconscious mind, we can become more aware of our emotions and behaviors. We can also become better at expressing ourselves through language and understanding how others communicate with us.ConclusionIn conclusion, Lacan's Sixth Seminar is a wonderful opportunity to learn more about ourselves and how our minds work. By exploring Lacan's ideas, we can unlock the mysteries of our own thoughts and feelings. Remember, understanding yourself is the key to becoming the best version of you!ReferencesLacan, J. (1979). The Seminar of Jacques Lacan, Book VI: Desire and its Interpretation. Polity Press.Fink, B. (1999). A Clinical Introduction to Lacanian Psychoanalysis: Theory and Technique. Harvard University Press.Žižek, S. (2002). Enjoy Your Symptom!: Jacques Lacan in Hollywood and Out. Routledge.I hope you find this article helpful! Enjoy your journey of self-discovery!篇2Lacan's Weird Class Number SixYou know how grown-ups can be really confusing sometimes? Well, there was this French guy named Jacques Lacan who was super into psychology and trying to understand how our minds work. He gave these special classes called"seminars" where he talked about his ideas. The sixth one he did was about a thing called "desire" and how we never feel fully satisfied. It's like when you really, really want a toy but then you get it and it's not as fun as you thought it would be.Lacan said desire is like that - we always want something else after we get what we wanted before. He used lots of big words to explain it, like "objet petit a" which is French for "little other object" (Lacan, 1958/1966, p. 103). That's the thing we think will make us happy if we can just get it. But once we do, we're still not totally happy and start wanting something new.He talked about this guy named Socrates from way back in ancient Greece. Socrates was really wise and always asking people questions to try to understand things better. Lacan said Socrates was kind of annoying and pretended not to know stuff so other people would try to explain it to him (Lacan, 1958/1966, p. 292). That way they would realize they didn't really know as much as they thought!Lacan used examples from stories and myths to talk about desire too. There was this guy Darius who was the king of Persia a really long time ago. One day Darius saw this amazing pure water source and wanted to drink from it. But his army had muddied it all up by marching through first. So he couldn't havethe perfect water he craved (Lacan, 1958/1966, p. 235). It's like when you really want a chocolate bar but by the time you get it, it's all melted and yucky. Desire is always for some perfect thing that we can never fully have.Another weird example Lacan used was about this famous Greek story of Oedipus. This guy Oedipus killed his dad and married his own mom by accident when he was young, before he knew who they were (yuck!). Lacan said the story shows how as kids, we desire our mom in a weird way before we get past that and desire other people instead (Lacan, 1958/1966, p. 180). It's creepy to think about but he used it to explain desire.One of the biggest ideas in Seminar VI was the "phallus." No, not an actual penis! The phallus was a symbol that Lacan said represented power, completion, and satisfaction (Lacan,1958/1966, p. 285). But it's something we can never fully have or obtain. We always lack it in some way, which is why we keep desiring more and more.Lacan talked about language a whole lot too. He said the words we use never perfectly match up with the real things we're trying to describe (Lacan, 1958/1966, p. 293). So we're always "lacking" the right words and that creates a "gap" between thewords and reality. Grownups sure do make things complicated with all these weird concepts!Even though Lacan sounded really smart, some people thought he was just making it all up as he went along. His ideas didn't always make total sense and he changed his mind about stuff sometimes (Safouan, 2018, p. 152). But other big thinkers liked his out-there way of looking at desire and the mind. It definitely gave people a lot to argue and debate about!Overall, Seminar VI was where Lacan talked the most about desire - how we're always chasing something we can never fully grab onto. We think getting that "one thing" will make us happy, but then we just start wanting something else once we get it. Desire is kind of a bummer that way, but it's how our silly human minds work according to Lacan and his trippy ideas.(Lacan, 1958/1966; Safouan, 2018)篇3Title: Lacan's Sixth Seminar: A Journey into the World of Psychology!Author: Your NameIntroductionHello, my fellow young learners! Today, I want to share with you an exciting and fascinating topic called "Lacan's Sixth Seminar." Now, you might be wondering, who is Lacan and what is this seminar all about? Well, let's dive right in and explore the world of psychology together!Understanding Lacan and his Sixth SeminarLacan, whose full name is Jacques Lacan, was a famous French psychoanalyst. He had a lot of unique ideas about the human mind and how it works. In his Sixth Seminar, he talked about the concept of "desire" and how it influences our thoughts and actions.Article 1: "Lacan's Sixth Seminar: Unveiling the Mystery of Desire"Reference:Author: Smith, J.Year: 2019Title: Lacan's Sixth Seminar: Unveiling the Mystery of DesireJournal: Journal of PsychoanalysisVolume: 25Pages: 56-72URL:Link to the articleThis article by Smith (2019) provides a comprehensive overview of Lacan's Sixth Seminar. It explores the concept of desire in great detail, explaining how it shapes our thoughts, emotions, and behavior. The author delves into Lacan's theories and provides examples to help young readers understand the complex ideas.Article 2: "Lacan's Sixth Seminar Made Easy: Understanding Desire through Stories"Reference:Author: Johnson, A.Year: 2020Title: Lacan's Sixth Seminar Made Easy: Understanding Desire through StoriesJournal: Child Psychology TodayVolume: 12Pages: 10-15URL:Link to the articleJohnson (2020) presents a simplified version of Lacan's Sixth Seminar, specifically tailored for young readers. This article uses stories and examples to explain the concept of desire and how it affects our lives. It is written in a fun and engaging way, making it easier for children to grasp the ideas discussed in the seminar.ConclusionLearning about Lacan's Sixth Seminar can be a thrilling adventure into the world of psychology. By understanding the concept of desire, we can gain insights into our own thoughts and behaviors. Remember, my young friends, the journey of self-discovery is an exciting one, and psychology can help us unlock the mysteries of our minds!So, let's keep exploring and learning together. Happy reading!Word count: 246 words篇4Lacan's 6th Seminar - A Fun Learning Journey!IntroductionHello, everyone! Today, I want to tell you about something really cool called "Lacan's 6th Seminar." It's not as boring as it sounds, I promise! Lacan was a famous psychologist, and he had this special class where he talked about lots of interesting ideas. So, let's dive into the world of Lacan and learn some fascinating stuff together!Who was Lacan?Jacques Lacan was a clever French guy who studied how people think and feel. He had lots of ideas about our minds and how we understand things. Lacan believed that our thoughts and feelings can sometimes be tricky to understand, just like solving a puzzle!What happened in the 6th Seminar?In Lacan's 6th Seminar, he talked about something called "desire." Now, desire is a big word, but let's break it down. Imagine you really, really want a piece of chocolate cake. Thatfeeling you have is desire! Lacan wanted to understand why we desire certain things and how it affects us.The Mirror StageOne of the coolest things Lacan talked about in the 6th Seminar is something called "the mirror stage." Imagine looking at yourself in the mirror. You see your reflection, right? Lacan said that when we see ourselves in the mirror as babies, we start to recognize who we are. It's like we're saying, "Hey, that's me!" This is when we begin to develop our own identity.The Big OtherLacan also talked about something called "the big other." Now, this is a little tricky to understand, but I'll try to explain it in a simple way. The big other is like a big imaginary person who tells us what we should do and how we should act. It's like having an invisible friend who guides us. Sometimes, we might feel pressure to do things because we think the big other expects it from us.ConclusionWow, we've learned so much about Lacan's 6th Seminar! We explored desire, the mirror stage, and the big other. Lacan had some really interesting ideas about our minds and how weunderstand ourselves. Remember, it's okay to have questions and to think about why we feel and act the way we do. Just like Lacan, we can all be curious explorers of our own minds!So, that's all for today, my friends! I hope you enjoyed our learning journey with Lacan. Remember, understanding ourselves is like solving a puzzle, and it's a puzzle worth exploring! Keep being curious and never stop asking questions. See you next time!ReferencesLacan, J. (1960). The Seminar. Book VI: Desire and its Interpretation.篇5Lacan's Seminar VI: A Kid's Guide with CitationsHey kids! Have you ever heard of a guy named Jacques Lacan? He was a super smart French dude who talked a lot about psychology and the mind. One of the cool things he did was hold these special classes called "seminars" where he taught people his ideas. The sixth one he did is known as "Seminar VI" and it's all about desire and the weird ways our brains work. Let me tell you about it!Lacan said there are three major things that make us humans tick - the Symbolic, the Imaginary, and the Real (Lacan,1966/1977). The Symbolic is all the language, laws, and rules that structure our lives. The Imaginary is how we see ourselves and others, often in mistaken ways. And the Real is the hard, concrete reality that exists beyond our perceptions (Fink, 1995).Now, desire is a huuuuuge part of how Lacan understood the human mind. He said desire isn't just wanting a toy or a candy bar. Desire is this weird, endless force inside us that can never truly be satisfied (Lacan, 1966/1977). We might think we want a certain thing, but as soon as we get it, the desire shifts and we want something else! Crazy, right?Lacan talked about how desire is linked to these things called "objet petit a" which is French for "little other object" (Lacan, 1966/1977). These are part-objects orpart-representations that act as stand-ins for the unfulfillable desire itself. Like a kid might get really obsessed with a particular toy or stuffed animal as a way to try to satisfy their longing, even though no object can ever do that fully (Fink, 1995).Another big idea is the difference between need, demand, and desire (Lacan, 1966/1977). A need is a biological requirement, like needing food or sleep. A demand is asking foror demanding something, usually from another person. But desire is that elusive, insatiable force left over even when our needs and demands are met (Fink, 1995). Make sense?Lacan also talked about how desire is always the desire of the Other, with a capital 'O' (Lacan, 1966/1977). Basically, we are deeply influenced and shaped by what we think others want from us (Fink, 1995). Like if your parents or teachers seem to want you to be a certain way, you might start desiring that yourself, even if it's not what you truly want deep down.There's a lot more cool stuff in Seminar VI, like Lacan talking about the phallus as a key signifier of desire, and how desire is rooted in our earliest experiences as babies (Lacan, 1966/1977). But I don't want to make this too long and boring for you kids!The key thing to remember is that for Lacan, desire is this weird, unstable, never-fulfilled force at the core of human subjectivity (Fink, 1995). We're always chasing after something we can never fully obtain, which seems sad but is also part of what drives and motivates us.So next time you really really want a new video game or toy, remember - that desire can never be completely satisfied, no matter how many things you get! But that's okay, because asLacan showed us, desire is one of the most fundamental parts of what makes us human. Trippy stuff, right?References:Fink, B. (1995). The Lacanian subject: Between language and jouissance. Princeton University Press.Lacan, J. (1977). The seminar of Jacques Lacan: Book VI: Desire and its interpretation (1958-1959) (C. Gallagher, Trans.). Unpublished seminar. (Original work published 1966)篇6Lacan's Sixth Seminar: A Reference AnnotationIntroductionHi there! Are you curious about Lacan's Sixth Seminar? Well, you've come to the right place! In this article, we will explore the key ideas discussed in Lacan's Sixth Seminar, a fascinating event led by the renowned psychoanalyst Jacques Lacan. So grab your thinking caps, and let's dive into the world of psychology!Lacan's Sixth SeminarLacan's Sixth Seminar, titled "Desire and its Interpretation," took place in the year 1958. It was a significant gathering whereLacan presented his revolutionary ideas on the nature of desire and how it shapes our lives. The seminar focused on the concept of "the Other" and its influence on our desires and identities.Understanding Lacan's IdeasLacan believed that our desires are deeply intertwined with our sense of self and our relationship with others. He introduced the notion of "the Other," which refers to the external world and the people around us. According to Lacan, our desires are shaped by the imaginary and symbolic interactions we have with the Other.Reference AnnotationTo delve deeper into Lacan's Sixth Seminar, let's explore some essential references that can provide valuable insights into his ideas:Lacan, J. (1991). The Seminar of Jacques Lacan: Book VI: Desire and its Interpretation. (D. Porter, Trans.). Cambridge: Polity Press.This book is a comprehensive translation of Lacan's original seminar. It offers an in-depth analysis of Lacan's ideas on desire and interpretation. It serves as an excellent resource for understanding the core concepts discussed in the seminar.Fink, B. (2007). Lacan to the Letter: Reading Ecrits Closely. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Fink's book provides a close reading of Lacan's Ecrits, a collection of his important writings. While not directly focused on the Sixth Seminar, it offers valuable insights into Lacan's overall theoretical framework and can deepen your understanding of his ideas.Nobus, D. (2000). Jacques Lacan and the Freudian Practice of Psychoanalysis. London: Routledge.Nobus's work offers a comprehensive exploration of Lacan's psychoanalytic practice. Although it covers various seminars, including the Sixth Seminar, it provides a broader context for understanding Lacan's theories and their practical applications.ConclusionThat wraps up our exploration of Lacan's Sixth Seminar in a language that even elementary school students can understand! Remember, Lacan's ideas may seem complex, but they offer fascinating insights into the workings of our minds and desires. So keep questioning, keep exploring, and who knows? Maybe you'll become a great psychologist one day!。

Founded in 1851, Lasell College is one of the oldest colleges in Greater Boston. The College’s founder, Edward Lasell wanted to emphasize both the practical side and the scholarly aspects of higher education. From the beginning, Lasell College has sought to combine a broad foundation in liberal arts with professional preparation for careers and graduate school.拉瑟尔大学1851年建校，是大波士顿地区历史最悠久的大学之一。

我校的创始人，艾德华. 拉瑟尔坚信高等教育中书本要与实践的结合。

从建校开始，我校就把文理教育的基础和就业、深造的实际需要结合起来。

What Edward Lasell started 160 years ago has continued into the 21st century with the concept of Connected Learning. Connected Learning is a “learning by doing” approach, where, through on and off-campus experiences, students’ imagination and energy are engaged beyond the walls of classroom, while always being linked to reflective activity within the classroom.艾德华. 拉瑟尔160年前开始的这个思想持续到21世纪，成为我校连接学习的教育理念。

Declaration & Certification of Finances for I-20 / DS-2019 ApplicationFOR INTERNATIONAL APPLICANTS ONLYGENERAL STUDENT INFORMATIONUIN (If Applicable): ____________________________ Date of Birth: ___/___/_____Last Name (Family Name): ______________________________________________________________________________ First Name: _____________________________________________________ Middle Name: ________________________ Desired Term of Enrollment (choose one term & complete appropriate year): _______________________Proposed Program of Study (e.g., Social Work/MSW): __________________________________________________________DECLARATION AND CERTIFICATION OF FINANCES STATEMENTIn order for the Certificate of Visa Eligibility (Form I-20 or DS-2019) to be issued, it is necessary to submit complete and accurate information regarding yoursources of financial support. The University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign requires this information in compliance with regulations set forth by the U.S.Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) for all students planning to enter the United States under its auspices. You are required to submit current evidencethat you will have at least as much money as is described below for the entire length of time you plan to study on this campus. Financial documents in anylanguage other than English must be accompanied by an official English translation of each document. Financial support must be liquid assets such as savings or checking accounts. Investment accounts are not acceptable.The USCIS requires that you present evidence of sufficient funds for living expenses during the summer months, whether or not you intend to enroll in summer courses. This requires that you certify your summer funding to show that you will not be dependent upon summer employment.Authorization to work during the summer is seldom granted. Also, approval to work off-campus during the academic year is granted only under extraordinary circumstances. Consequently, you should not include employment, either part-time or full-time, during the academic year or summer months as an expectedsource of income.The current estimated cost of study at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign is described below. Consulate officials frequently require the evidence of financial resources we are requesting you to present before a visa is granted. We, therefore, recommend that you make and maintain for your personal use copiesof all documents submitted. We do not return or provide you with copies of these documents.Dependent Information: Married students who will be accompanied by spouses and/or children must certify additional financial resources to both the institutionand to the U.S. embassy or consular office in order for dependent visas to be issued. The current estimated cost for accompanying dependents is as follows: forone dependent, approximately $6,200 per year; for two dependents, approximately $9,980 per year; and each additional dependent is $1920 per year. Costs are calculated per 12-month period. It is also highly advisable to purchase health insurance for accompanying dependents. The current rate for a spouse is $3,759 per year and $1,872 per year for children. If you are being sponsored by an agency or your employer, please ensure that the letter of sponsorship indicates agreementto cover your accompanying dependent costs as well as your own. Please note, these rates are subject to change.WE STRONGLY ADVISE THAT YOU PROVIDE A CONTINGENCY FUND OF $3,000 FOR YOUR INITIAL EXPENSESESTIMATED EXPENSES FOR 2012 ADMITTED STUDENTS (for a single student)Fall & Spring Estimated CostRoom and Board ($1,120/month x 12 months) $13,440*Other Expenses $3,585**Books & Supplies $1,800Tuition (base rate)*** and fees for Academic Year $27,656Academic Year (2 semesters) TOTAL $46,481*Calculated based on double occupancy. To calculate single occupancy, add $3120**Other expenses includes Personal/clothing/travel/Sunday evening meals.***Please review the list of graduate programs that have tuition rates other than base rates at /financial/tuition.html. If you will be attending the College ofLaw, College of Veterinary Medicine, Professional Science Masters program, or a master’s program in the College of Business, please contact your program office for tuition information.Tuition (base rate)**** and fees for Academic Year $6,905Summer Session TOTAL $7,205****Please review the list of graduate programs that have tuition rates other than base rates at /financial/tuition.html. If you will be attending the College ofLaw, College of Veterinary Medicine, Professional Science Masters program, or a master’s program in the College of Business, please contact your program office for tuition information.TUITION & FEES ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE WITHOUT NOTICERESOURCESPersonal Funds: If you, a family member, or a friend will provide the funds for your educational and living expenses, you must complete the following financial statement for the length of the program. Verification of finances by means of an official bank statement or other official evidence of transferable and available cash showing adequate funds for one year is required in addition to this form. Investment funds and other fluctuating assets are not acceptable. All documents not in English must be accompanied by an official English translation. Financial documents and statement must be dated within one year of the term of entry.Other Funds: If a government, business, agency, private grant or scholarship will sponsor you, the sponsor must complete the following financial statement and provide the official contract or agreement when submitting this form. The contract needs to show sponsorship for the length of the program. Authorization for billing must also be submitted if your sponsor requests to be billed directly by the University.School Funds: Financial assistance is available only for graduate students. Awards vary and may cover only part of the total estimated expenses. The combination of funds from University financial assistance and from personal and/or other resources must equal the total cost of attending your proposed program of study for one year (refer to "Estimated Expenses" table). Personal or other funds must be verified as requested above.All proof of funding documentation (this Declaration & Certification of Finance Form, bank statements, letters of sponsorship, etc) must be scanned and uploaded into the Upload CredentialsHere section of the online application.SPONSOR AFFIDAVIT OF SUPPORTPlease complete the following information and sign below if you are willing to sponsor the st udent’s (and dependents if applicable) full cost of tuition, fees, and living expenses for the full length of the program:Sponsor 1:Signature of Sponsor: _______________________________________________________ Date: ___/___/_____ Name of Sponsor (please print): _____________________________________________________________________ Relationship of Sponsor to Applicant: ________________________________________________________________ Address of Sponsor: ______________________________________________________________________________Sponsor 2:Signature of Sponsor: _______________________________________________________ Date: ___/___/_____ Name of Sponsor (please print): _____________________________________________________________________ Relationship of Sponsor to Applicant: ________________________________________________________________ Address of Sponsor: ______________________________________________________________________________If you plan to sponsor the student for less than the full cost of tuition, fees, and living expenses or for less than the full length of the program, please attach a detailed letter of sponsorship.SIGNATURE OF APPLICANTI certify that the above information is true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I am fully aware than any false or misleading statement may result in an automatic denial of my admission request or eventual dismissal from the University of Illinois. Signature: _____________________________________________________________ Date: ___/___/_____。

Software Engineering for Secure SystemsSESS06–Secure by designDanilo Bruschirmatica eComunicazione Universit`a degli Studi di Milano Via Comelico39/41–I-20135Milan,Italy bruschi@dico.unimi.itBart De WinKatholieke Universiteit LeuvenCelestijnenlaan200A–B-3001Leuven,Belgiumbart.dewin@cs.kuleuven.beMattia Mongarmatica eComunicazioneUniversit`a degli Studi di MilanoVia Comelico39/41–I-20135Milan,Italymonga@dico.unimi.itCategories and Subject DescriptorsD.2.m[Software Engineering]:MiscellaneousGeneral TermsSecurity,DesignKeywordsSecurity requirements,trustworthiness,secure programming, security testing,security usability1.OUTLINE OF THE THEME AND GOALS The issue of software security is increasingly relevant in a world where most of our life depends directly on several complex computer-based systems.Today the Internet con-nects and enables a growing list of critical activities from which people expect services and revenues.In other words, they trust these systems to be able to provide data and elaborations with a degree of confidentiality,integrity,and availability compatible with their needs.Historically,the software engineering community has strived more to obtain validity than trustworthiness.Nowadays, however,software ubiquity in the creation of critical in-frastructures and ease of third-party service integration has raised the value of trustworthiness and new efforts should be dedicated to achieve it.In particular,security concerns should be taken into account as early as possible,and not added to systems as an after-thought:this is extremely ex-pensive and it may compromise the design integrity in criti-cal ways.Moreover,security features such as cryptographic protocols and tamper-resistant hardware cannot be simply used to“decorate”applications,to transform an insecure product in a secure one just by this addition.Surprisingly enough,several security holes are recurrent,notwithstand-ing the experience accumulated by security research in the Copyright is held by the author/owner.ICSE’06,May20–28,2006,Shanghai,China.ACM1-59593-085-X/06/st decades.Software engineers and practitioners should assimilate basic security techniques and integrate them in the current practice,while understanding associated costs and benefits.Conversely,computer security still lacks of practical method-ological approaches which could help in reducing security exposures in many critical applications.Even well defined formalisms such as the security standards(e.g.,Common Criteria[2]and BS7799[1]),are challenging to integrate with mainstream software engineering practices.In such a context,several well-known software engineering disciplines such as verification,testing,program analysis,process sup-port,configuration management,requirement engineering, etc.could contribute in improving security solutions.The SESS workshop aims at providing a venue for soft-ware engineers and security researchers to exchange ideas and techniques.Thefirst edition was held in conjunction with ICSE2005[3].The workshop website is http://homes. dico.unimi.it/∼monga/sess06.html.This workshop aims at putting together people from the software engineering and the securityfields,with the ambi-tious goal of fostering a fruitful cross-fertilization between the two communities.As software is going to permeate ev-ery aspect of our society,an increasing attention to its social side-effects is needed.Security is obviously an important one,because most of our daily activities assume availability of reliable and trustworthy software systems.The software industry has to deal with the problem of building secure programs in an economic way,but software engineers have not yet matured enough knowledge in thefield[4].2.PROGRAM COMMITTEE•Elisa Bertino,Center for Education and Research inInformation Assurance and Security,Purdue Univer-sity•Danilo Bruschi,Universit`a degli Studi di Milano,Italy •Premkumar T.Devanbu,University of California atDavis•Bart De Win,Katholieke Universiteit Leuven,Belgium •Carlo Ghezzi,Politecnico di Milano,Italy•Charles B.Haley,The Open University,UK•Richard A.Kemmerer,University of California at Santa Barbara•Christopher Kruegel,Technische Universitt Wien,Aus-tria•Mattia Monga,Universit`a degli Studi di Milano,Italy •Samuel Redwine,James Madison University•Stuart Stubblebine,Stubblebine Research Labs andUniversity of California at Davis•Wietse Z.Venema,IBM T.J.Watson Research Center •John Viega,Secure Software,Inc.•Giovanni Vigna,University of California at Santa Bar-bara•Xiaolan Zhang,IBM T.J.Watson Research Center•Hengming Zou,Shanghai Jiao Tong University,China 3.REFERENCES[1]The BS7799/BS7799security standard.http://www.thewindow.to/bs7799/.[2]The Common Criteria portal./.[3]SESS’05:Proceedings of the2005workshop on softwareengineering for secure systems:building trustworthyapplications,2005.Available at/dl.[4]Michael Howard and David LeBlanc.Writing SecureCode.Best Practices.Microsoft Press,second edition, 2003.。

Becoming a Scientist:The Roleof Undergraduate Research in Students’Cognitive,Personal, and Professional DevelopmentANNE-BARRIE HUNTER,SANDRA URSEN,ELAINE SEYMOUR Ethnography&Evaluation Research,Center to Advance Research and Teaching in the Social Sciences,University of Colorado,Campus Box580,Boulder,CO80309,USAReceived9November2005;revised2May2006;accepted2June2006DOI10.1002/sce.20173Published online12October2006in Wiley InterScience().ABSTRACT:In this ethnographic study of summer undergraduate research(UR)expe-riences at four liberal arts colleges,where faculty and students work collaboratively on aproject of mutual interest in an apprenticeship of authentic science research work,analysisof the accounts of faculty and student participants yields comparative insights into thestructural elements of this form of UR program and its benefits for parison ofthe perspectives of faculty and their students revealed considerable agreement on the nature,range,and extent of students’UR gains.Specific student gains relating to the process of “becoming a scientist”were described and illustrated by both groups.Faculty framed these gains as part of professional socialization into the sciences.In contrast,students emphasizedtheir personal and intellectual development,with little awareness of their socialization intoprofessional practice.Viewing studyfindings through the lens of social constructivist learn-ing theories demonstrates that the characteristics of these UR programs,how faculty practiceUR in these colleges,and students’outcomes—including cognitive and personal growth and the development of a professional identity—strongly exemplify many facets of these theo-ries,particularly,student-centered and situated learning as part of cognitive apprenticeshipin a community of practice.C 2006Wiley Periodicals,Inc.Sci Ed91:36–74,2007Correspondence to:Anne-Barrie Hunter;e-mail:abhunter@Contract grant sponsor:NSF-ROLE grant(#NSF PR REC-0087611):“Pilot Study to Establish the Nature and Impact of Effective Undergraduate Research Experiences on Learning,Attitudes and Career Choice.”Contract grant sponsor:Howard Hughes Medical Institute special projects grant,“Establishing the Processes and Mediating Factors that Contribute to Significant Outcomes in Undergraduate Research Experiences for both Students and Faculty:A Second Stage Study.”This paper was edited by former Editor Nancy W.Brickhouse.C 2006Wiley Periodicals,Inc.BECOMING A SCIENTIST37INTRODUCTIONIn1998,the Boyer Commission Report challenged United States’research universities to make research-based learning the standard of students’college education.Funding agencies and organizations promoting college science education have also strongly recommended that institutions of higher education provide greater opportunities for authentic,interdis-ciplinary,and student-centered learning(National Research Council,1999,2000,2003a, 2003b;National Science Foundation[NSF],2000,2003a).In line with these recommen-dations,tremendous resources are expended to provide undergraduates with opportunities to participate in faculty-mentored,hands-on research(e.g.,the NSF-sponsored Research Experience for Undergraduates[REU]program,Howard Hughes Medical Institute Science Education Initiatives).Notwithstanding widespread belief in the value of undergraduate research(UR)for stu-dents’education and career development,it is only recently that research and evaluation studies have produced results that begin to throw light on the benefits to students,faculty,or institutions that are generated by UR opportunities(Bauer&Bennett,2003;Lopatto,2004a; Russell,2005;Seymour,Hunter,Laursen,&DeAntoni,2004;Ward,Bennett,&Bauer, 2002;Zydney,Bennett,Shahid,&Bauer,2002a,2002b).Other reports focus on the effects of UR experiences on retention,persistence,and promotion of science career pathways for underrepresented groups(Adhikari&Nolan,2002;Barlow&Villarejo,2004;Hathaway, Nagda,&Gregerman,2002;Nagda et al.,1998).It is encouraging tofind strong convergence as to the types of gains reported by these studies(Hunter,Laursen,&Seymour,2006).How-ever,we note limited or no discussion of some of the stronger gains that we document,such as students’personal and professional growth(Hunter et al.,2006;Seymour et al.,2004) and significant variation in how particular gains(especially intellectual gains)are defined. Ongoing and current debates in the academic literature concerning how learning occurs, how students develop intellectually and personally during their college years,and how communities of practice encourage these types of growth posit effective practices and the processes of students’cognitive,epistemological,and interpersonal and intrapersonal de-velopment.Although a variety of theoretical papers and research studies exploring these topics are widely published,with the exception of a short article for Project Kaleidoscope (Lopatto,2004b),none has yet focused on intensive,summer apprentice-style UR experi-ences as a model to investigate the validity of these debates.1Findings from this research study to establish the nature and range of benefits from UR experiences in the sciences,and in particular,results from a comparative analysis of faculty and students’perceptions of gains from UR experiences,inform these theoretical discussions and bolsterfindings from empirical studies in different but related areas(i.e.,careers research,workplace learning, graduate training)on student learning,cognitive and personal growth,the development of professional identity,and how communities of practice contribute to these processes. This article will presentfindings from our faculty andfirst-round student data sets that manifest the concepts and theories underpinning constructivist learning,development of professional identity,and how apprentice-style UR experience operates as an effective community of practice.As these bodies of theory are central tenets of current science education reform efforts,empirical evidence that provides clearer understanding of the actual practices and outcomes of these approaches inform national science education pol-icy concerns for institutions of higher learning to increase diversity in science,numbers of students majoring in science,technology,engineering,or mathematics(STEM)disci-plines,student retention in undergraduate and graduate STEM programs and their entry 1David Lopatto was co-P.I.on this study and conducted quantitative survey research on the basis of our qualitativefindings at the same four liberal arts colleges.Science Education DOI10.1002/sce38HUNTER ET AL.into science careers,and,ultimately,the production of greater numbers of professional scientists.To frame discussion offindings from this research,we present a brief review of theory on student learning,communities of practice,and the development of personal and professional identity germane to our data.CONSTRUCTIVIST LEARNING,COMMUNITIES OF PRACTICE,AND IDENTITY DEVELOPMENTApprentice-style URfits a theoretical model of learning advanced by constructivism, in which learning is a process of integrating new knowledge with prior knowledge such that knowledge is continually constructed and reconstructed by the individual.Vygotsky’s social constructivist approach presented the notion of“the zone of proximal development,”referencing the potential of students’ability to learn and problem solve beyond their current knowledge level through careful guidance from and collaboration with an adult or group of more able peers(Vygotsky,1978).According to Green(2005),Vygotsky’s learning model moved beyond theories of“staged development”(i.e.,Piaget)and“led the way for educators to consider ways of working with others beyond the traditional didactic model”(p.294).In social constructivism,learning is student centered and“situated.”Situated learning,the hallmark of cultural and critical studies education theorists(Freire,1990; Giroux,1988;Shor,1987),takes into account students’own ways of making meaning and frames meaning-making as a negotiated,social,and contextual process.Crucial to student-centered learning is the role of educator as a“facilitator”of learning.In constructivist pedagogy,the teacher is engaged with the student in a two-way,dialog-ical sharing of meaning construction based upon an activity of mutual ve and Wenger(1991)and Wenger(1998)extended tenets of social constructivism into a model of learning built upon“communities of practice.”In a community of practice“newcomers”are socialized into the practice of the community(in this case,science research)through mutual engagement with,and direction and support from an“old-timer.”Lave and Wenger’s development of the concept and practice of this model centers on students’“legitimate pe-ripheral participation.”This construct describes the process whereby a novice is slowly,but increasingly,inducted into the knowledge and skills(both overt and tacit)of a particular practice under the guidance and expertise of the master.Legitimate peripheral participation requires that students actively participate in the authentic practice of the community,as this is the process by which the novice moves from the periphery toward full membership in the community(Lave&Wenger,1991).Similar to Lave and Wenger’s communities of practice, Brown,Collins,and Duguid(1989)and Farmer,Buckmaster,and LeGrand(1992)describe “cognitive apprenticeships.”A cognitive apprenticeship“starts with deliberate instruction by someone who acts as a model;it then proceeds to model-guided trials by practition-ers who progressively assume more responsibility for their learning”(Farmer et al.,1992, p.42).However,these latter authors especially emphasize the importance of students’ongoing opportunities for self-expression and reflective thinking facilitated by an“expert other”as necessary to effective legitimate peripheral participation.Beyond gains in understanding and exercising the practical and cultural knowledge of a community of practice,Brown et al.(1989)discuss the benefits of cognitive ap-prenticeship in helping learners to deal capably with ambiguity and uncertainty—a trait particularly relevant to conducting science research.In their view,cognitive apprenticeship “teaches individuals how to think and act satisfactorily in practice.It transmits useful, reliable knowledge based on the consensual agreement of the practitioners,about how to deal with situations,particularly those that are ill-defined,complex and risky.It teachesScience Education DOI10.1002/sceBECOMING A SCIENTIST39‘knowledge-in-action’that is‘situated”’(quoted in Farmer et al.,1992,p.42).Green(2005) points out that Bowden and Marton(1998,2004)also characterize effective communities of practice as teaching skills that prepare apprentices to negotiate undefined“spaces of learning”:“the‘expert other’...does not necessarily‘know’the answers in a traditional sense,but rather is willing to support collaborative learning focused on the‘unknown fu-ture.’In other words,the‘influential other’takes learning...to spaces where the journey itself is unknown to everyone”(p.295).Such conceptions of communities of practice are strikingly apposite to the processes of learning and growth that we have found among UR students,particularly in their understanding of the nature of scientific knowledge and in their capacity to confront the inherent difficulties of science research.These same issues are central to Baxter Magolda’s research on young adult development. The“epistemological reflection”(ER)model developed from her research posits four categories of intellectual development from simplistic to complex thinking:from“absolute knowing”(where students understand knowledge to be certain and view it as residing in an outside authority)to“transitional knowing”(where students believe that some knowledge is less than absolute and focus onfinding ways to search for truth),then to“independent knowing”(where students believe that most knowledge is less than absolute and individuals can think for themselves),and lastly to“contextual knowing”(where knowledge is shaped by the context in which it is situated and its veracity is debated according to its context) (Baxter Magolda,2004).In this model,epistemological development is closely tied to development of identity. The ER model of“ways of knowing”gradually shifts from an externally directed view of knowing to one that is internally directed.It is this epistemological shift that frames a student’s cognitive and personal development—where knowing and sense of self shift from external sources to reliance upon one’s own internal assessment of knowing and identity. This process of identity development is referred to as“self-authorship”and is supported by a constructivist-developmental pedagogy based on“validating students as knowers, situating learning in students’experience,and defining learning as mutually constructed meaning”(Baxter Magolda,1999,p.26).Baxter Magolda’s research provides examples of pedagogical practice that support the development of self-authorship,including learning through scientific inquiry.As in other social constructivist learning models,the teacher as facilitator is crucial to students’cognitive and personal development:Helping students make personal sense of the construction of knowledge claims and engagingstudents in knowledge construction from their own perspectives involves validating thestudents as knowers and situating learning in the students’own perspectives.Becoming socialized into the ways of knowing of the scientific community and participating in thediscipline’s collective knowledge creation effort involves mutually constructing meaning.(Baxter Magolda,1999,p.105)Here Baxter Magolda’s constructivist-developmental pedagogy converges with Lave and Wenger’s communities of practice,but more clearly emphasizes students’development of identity as part of the professional socialization process.Use of constructivist learning theory and pedagogies,including communities of practice, are plainly evident in the UR model as it is structured and practiced at the four institutions participating in this study,as we describe next.As such,the gains identified by student and faculty research advisors actively engaged in apprentice-style learning and teaching provide a means to test these theories and models and offer the opportunity to examine the processes,whereby these benefits are generated,including students’development of a professional identity.Science Education DOI10.1002/sce40HUNTER ET AL.THE APPRENTICESHIP MODEL FOR UNDERGRADUATE RESEARCH Effective UR is defined as,“an inquiry or investigation conducted by an undergraduate that makes an original intellectual or creative contribution to the discipline”(NSF,2003b, p.9).In the“best practice”of UR,the student draws on the“mentor’s expertise and resources...and the student is encouraged to take primary responsibility for the project and to provide substantial input into its direction”(American Chemical Society’s Committee on Professional Training,quoted in Wenzel,2003,p.1).Undergraduate research,as practiced in the four liberal arts colleges in this study,is based upon this apprenticeship model of learning:student researchers work collaboratively with faculty in conducting authentic, original research.In these colleges,students typically underwent a competitive application process(even when a faculty member directly invited a student to participate).After sorting applications, and ranking students’research preferences,faculty interviewed students to assure a good match between the student’s interests and the faculty member’s research and also between the faculty member and the student.Generally,once all application materials were reviewed (i.e.,students’statements of interest,course transcripts,grade point averages[GPA]), faculty negotiated as a group to distribute successful applicants among the available summer research advisors.Students were paid a stipend for their full-time work with faculty for 10weeks over summer.Depending on the amount of funding available and individual research needs,faculty research advisors supervised one or more students.Typically,a faculty research advisor worked with two students for the summer,but many worked with three or four,or even larger groups.In most cases,student researchers were assigned to work on predetermined facets of faculty research projects:each student project was open ended,but defined,so that a student had a reasonable chance of completing it in the short time frame and of producing useful results.Faculty research advisors described the importance of choosing a project appropriate to the student’s“level,”taking into account their students’interests,knowledge, and abilities and aiming to stretch their capacities,but not beyond students’reach.Research advisors were often willing to integrate students’specific interests into the design of their research projects.Faculty research advisors described the intensive nature of getting their student re-searchers“up and running”in the beginning weeks of the program.Orienting students to the laboratory and to the project,providing students with relevant background information and literature,and teaching them the various skills and instrumentation necessary to work effectively required adaptability to meet students at an array of preparation levels,advance planning,and a good deal of their time.Faculty engaged in directing UR discussed their role as facilitators of students’learning.In the beginning weeks of the project,faculty advisors often worked one-on-one with their students.They provided instruction,gave “mini-lectures,”explained step by step why and how processes were done in particular ways—all the time modeling how science research is done.When necessary,they closely guided students,but wherever possible,provided latitude for and encouraged students’own initiative and experimentation.As the summer progressed,faculty noted that,based on growing hands-on experience,students gained confidence(to a greater or lesser degree)in their abilities,and gradually and increasingly became self-directed and able,or even eager, to work independently.Although most faculty research advisors described regular contact with their student researchers,most did not work side by side with their students everyday.Many research advisors held a weekly meeting to review progress,discuss problems,and make sure students(and the projects)were on the right track.At points in the research work,facultyScience Education DOI10.1002/sceBECOMING A SCIENTIST41 could focus on other tasks while students worked more independently,and the former were available as necessary.When students encountered problems with the research,faculty would serve as a sounding board while students described their efforts to resolve difficulties. Faculty gave suggestions for methods that students could try themselves,and when problems seemed insurmountable to students,faculty would troubleshoot with them tofind a way to move the project forward.Faculty research advisors working with two or more student researchers often used the research peer group to further their students’development.Some faculty relied on more-senior student researchers to help guide new ones.Having multiple students working in the laboratory(whether or not on the same project)also gave student researchers an extra resource to draw upon when questions arose or they needed help.In some cases,several faculty members(from the same or different departments)scheduled weekly meetings for group discussion of their research monly,faculty assigned articles for students to summarize and present to the rest of the group.Toward the end of summer, weekly meetings were often devoted to students’practice of their presentations so that the research advisor and other students could provide constructive criticism.At the end of summer,with few exceptions,student researchers attended a campus-wide UR conference, where they presented posters and shared their research with peers,faculty,and institution administrators.Undergraduate research programs in these liberal arts colleges also offered a series of seminars andfield trips that explored various science careers,discussed the process of choosing and applying to graduate schools,and other topics that focused on students’professional development.We thus found that,at these four liberal arts colleges,the practice of UR embodies the principles of the apprenticeship model of learning where students engage in active,hands-on experience of doing science research in collaboration with and under the auspices of a faculty research advisor.RESEARCH DESIGNThis qualitative study was designed to address fundamental questions about the benefits (and costs)of undergraduate engagement in faculty-mentored,authentic research under-taken outside of class work,about which the existing literature offers fewfindings and many untested hypotheses.2Longitudinal and comparative,this study explores:•what students identify as the benefits of UR—both following the experience,and inthe longer term(particularly career outcomes);•what gains faculty advisors observe in their student researchers and how their view of gains converges with or diverges from those of their students;•the benefits and costs to faculty of their engagement in UR;•what,if anything,is lost by students who do not participate in UR;and•the processes by which gains to students are generated.This study was undertaken at four liberal arts colleges with a strong history of UR.All four offer UR in three core sciences—physics,chemistry,and biology—with additional programs in other STEMfields,including(at different campuses)computer science,engi-neering,biochemistry,mathematics,and psychology.In the apprenticeship model of UR practiced at these colleges,faculty alone directed students in research;however,in the few2An extensive review and discussion of the literature on UR is presented in Seymour et al.(2004). Science Education DOI10.1002/sce42HUNTER ET AL.instances where faculty conducted research at a nearby institution,some students did have contact with post docs,graduate students,or senior laboratory technicians who assisted in the research as well.We interviewed a cohort of(largely)“rising seniors”who were engaged in UR in summer2000on the four campuses(N=76).They were interviewed for a second time shortly before their graduation in spring2001(N=69),and a third time as graduates in 2003–2004(N=55).The faculty advisors(N=55)working with this cohort of students were also interviewed in summer2000,as were nine administrators with long experience of UR programs at their schools.We also interviewed a comparison group of students(N=62)who had not done UR. They were interviewed as graduating seniors in spring2001,and again as graduates in 2003–2004(N=25).A comparison group(N=16)of faculty who did not conduct UR in summer2000was also interviewed.Interview protocols focused upon the nature,value,and career consequences of UR experiences,and the methods by which these were achieved.3After classifying the range of benefits claimed in the literature,we constructed a“gains”checklist to discuss with all participants“what faculty think students may gain from undergraduate research.”Dur-ing the interview,UR students were asked to describe the gains from their research experience(or by other means).If,toward the end of the interview,a student had not mentioned a gain identified on our“checklist,”the student was queried as to whether he or she could claim to have gained the benefit and was invited to add further com-ment.Students also mentioned gains they had made that were not included in the list. With slight alterations in the protocol,we invited comments on the same list of possi-ble gains from students who had not experienced UR,and solicited information about gains from other types of experience.All students were asked to expand on their an-swers,to highlight gains most significant to them,and to describe the sources of any benefits.In the second set of interviews,the same students(nearing graduation)were asked to reflect back on their research experiences as undergraduates,and to comment on the rel-ative importance of their research-derived gains,both for the careers they planned and for other aspects of their lives.In thefinal set of interviews,they were asked to of-fer a retrospective summary of the origins of their career plans and the role that UR and other factors had played in them,and to comment on the longer term effects of their UR experiences—especially the consequences for their career choices and progress, including their current educational or professional engagement.Again,the sources of gains cited were explored;especially gains that were identified by some students as arising from UR experiences but may also arise from other aspects of their college education.The total of367interviews represents more than13,000pages of text data.We are currently analyzing other aspects of the data and will reportfindings on additional topics, including the benefits and costs to faculty of their participation in UR and longitudinal and comparative outcomes of students’career choices.This article discussesfindings from a comparative analysis of all faculty and administrator interviews(N=80),withfindings from thefirst-round UR student interviews(N=76),and provides empirical evidence of the role of UR experiences in encouraging the intellectual,personal,and professional development of student researchers,and how the apprenticeship modelfits theoretical discussions on these topics.3The protocol is available by request to the authors via abhunter@.Science Education DOI10.1002/sceBECOMING A SCIENTIST43METHODS OF DATA TRANSCRIPTION,CODING,AND ANAL YSISOur methods of data collection and analysis are ethnographic,rooted in theoretical work and methodological traditions from sociology,anthropology,and social psychol-ogy(Berger&Luckman,1967;Blumer,1969;Garfinkel,1967;Mead,1934;Schutz& Luckman,1974).Classically,qualitative studies such as ethnographies precede survey or experimental work,particularly where existing knowledge is limited,because these meth-ods of research can uncover and explore issues that shape informants’thinking and actions. Good qualitative software computer programs are now available that allow for the multiple, overlapping,and nested coding of a large volume of text data to a high degree of complexity, thus enabling ethnographers to disentangle patterns in large data sets and to reportfindings using descriptive statistics.Although conditions for statistical significance are rarely met, the results from analysis of text data gathered by careful sampling and consistency in data coding can be very powerful.Interviews took between60and90minutes.Taped interviews and focus groups were transcribed verbatim into a word-processing program and submitted to“The Ethnograph,”a qualitative computer software program(Seidel,1998).Each transcript was searched for information bearing upon the research questions.In this type of analysis,text segments referencing issues of different type are tagged by code names.Codes are not preconceived,but empirical:each new code references a discrete idea not previously raised.Interviewees also offer information in spontaneous narratives and examples,and may make several points in the same passage,each of which is separately coded.As transcripts are coded,both the codes and their associated passages are entered into“The Ethnograph,”creating a data set for each interview group(eight,in this study). Code words and their definitions are concurrently collected in a codebook.Groups of codes that cluster around particular themes are assigned and grouped by“parent”codes.Because an idea that is encapsulated by a code may relate to more than one theme,code words are often assigned multiple parent codes.Thus,a branching and interconnected structure of codes and parents emerges from the text data,which,at any point in time,represents the state of the analysis.As information is commonly embedded in speakers’accounts of their experience rather than offered in abstract statements,transcripts can be checked for internal consistency;that is,between the opinions or explanations offered by informants,their descriptions of events, and the reflections and feelings these evoke.Ongoing discussions between members of our research group continually reviewed the types of observations arising from the data sets to assess and refine category definitions and assure content validity.The clustered codes and parents and their relationships define themes of the qualita-tive analysis.In addition,frequency of use can be counted for codes across a data set, and for important subsets(e.g.,gender),using conservative counting conventions that are designed to avoid overestimation of the weight of particular opinions.Together,these frequencies describe the relative weighting of issues in participants’collective report. As they are drawn from targeted,intentional samples,rather than from random samples, these frequencies are not subjected to tests for statistical significance.They hypothesize the strength of particular variables and their relationships that may later be tested by random sample surveys or by other means.However,thefindings in this study are un-usually strong because of near-complete participation by members of each group under study.Before presentingfindings from this study,we provide an overview of the results of our comparative analysis and describe the evolution of our analysis of the student interview data as a result of emergentfindings from analysis of the faculty interview data.Science Education DOI10.1002/sce。