(Nakahara)Hello. I’m Jun Nakahara from the University of Tokyo. Today, we will be having a discussion with Dr. Shuichi Hiraoka from the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences. Thank you for coming. I would first like to start with your background. Could you tell us about your field? (Hiraoka)Sure. My research field is called organic chemistry and supramolecular chemistry. (Nakahara)I see…but I’m sorry. I’m completely a humanities person and have no idea what organic chemistry and supramolecular chemistry are. Could you explain a little more? (Hiraoka)Organic chemistry deals with what is called organic matter. Almost all the molecules inside our body are organic substances. Supermolecules refer to the aggregation of molecules such as various DNA found in bodies, proteins, and viruses. These things actually start with small components and can be constructed through a phenomenon called self-assembly. Instead of investigating preexisting organic molecules, my present research focuses on artificially creating such aggregations with the molecules we made ourselves by using organic chemistry and examining how such aggregations are created. (Nakahara)I see. Then does it mean that your research is related to various kinds of basic technology? (Hiraoka)Yes, it is. It is used in biotechnology and basic technology as you mentioned. It is regarded as one of the highly promising molecular technologies. (Nakahara)I see. I heard that you have been using an Active Learning style in your science classes since last year, where students can participate actively. Generally speaking, Active Learning seems to be used more frequently in the field of humanities than in science. Could you tell us about your class? (Hiraoka)Komaba Organization for Educational Excellence opened a new course called “Let’s Enjoy Natural Science through Active Learning” during the winter semester last year. There were 13 classes, and I had an opportunity to take charge of 2 classes focusing on Chemistry. The two classes I was in charge of focused on so-called Professional Chemistry. The concept was to have the students exposed to cutting-edge Chemistry and enjoy learning it by engaging in Active Learning. (Nakahara)I see. Then, was the course intended for undergraduate students, especially those in their first or second year, in order to have them learn the basics of natural science through Active Learning? (Hiraoka)Yes, it was. But it does include professional materials. Researchers of each field present part of their cutting-edge studies, but those are usually incomprehensible for the first-year students, so they explain them in plain words. Classes delivered in that way already exist at the University of Tokyo, but in this course, we are provided with two sessions to teach. After explaining the content in the first session, the second session was entirely devoted to discussion. (Nakahara)I see. Since there is so much students must learn, I had the image of science courses conducted mainly in lecture style. I would not say instructors cram students with knowledge, but I thought that there must be so much information to teach. Is it common for science courses to incorporate discussion in class time? (Hiraoka)As you mentioned, most scientific courses for undergraduates are conducted as a lecture from the professor, outside of experiments and seminars. That means instructors completely teach students. However, at the graduate level, most of the lab meetings are conducted with discussions. For example, in a reading circle, students should prepare for it, introduce the literature, and exchange opinions and questions with other graduate students and instructors. Essentially, deepening one’s understanding of the discipline through active leaning is the authentic way to learn science. (Nakahara)I see. Then you can say that researchers themselves do not use the word “Active Learning”, but they are in fact engaged in research based on discussion. However, classes for undergraduates, including first-year students, are not based on discussion. I suppose there must be a huge gap between them. (Hiraoka)Yes, there is. In a humanities course, discussion topics are likely to be social issues, which are relatively easy for the first-year students to get involved in, but in a science course, they lack the technical terms or knowledge necessary for engaging in a discussion, which leads to a gap in comprehension between the students and instructors/graduates. In general, the four-year undergraduate period is to bridge that gap, so I think that’s why undergraduate courses mainly focus on teaching knowledge, on the grounds that students need to acquire knowledge to get prepared for engaging in a discussion. (Nakahara)I see. That led to the undergraduate science courses being piled up with so much content to be transferred to the students. It is nice that students in their first year can experience engaging in discussion ahead of schedule while learning such knowledge. (Hiraoka)Yes. I personally think that discussion skills can be nurtured regardless of age, so you can start even before entering universities… (Nakahara)I agree. (Hiraoka)In that sense, I think it better to go through discussion training with one's existing knowledge at the moment rather than engaging in discussion only after accumulating one’s knowledge and becoming a researcher. (Nakahara)Yes. I heard that next year the University of Tokyo will begin a course called the “First-Year Seminar”, and for science students. It will be a compulsory course with 100 sessions conducted in Active Learning style. Could you tell us more about this program? (Hiraoka)The program aims to acquire science students with writing skills, presentation skills, etc. I am going to take charge of one of the courses next year, so I conducted a preliminary class in this summer semester. In that class, I asked the students to think about self-assembly, which is close to my field. However, students’ chemical knowledge was insufficient for a professional level, so I drew up a task with no correct answer so that students could actively deal with it using their first-year-level knowledge. I let students discuss, write papers, and peer review papers with each other. I also asked them to make presentations and give comments to each other. I did things like that. (Nakahara)Wow! It sounds like an approach to early exposure for becoming a researcher. You are showing the students in advance what they will be likely to do when they become researchers. (Hiraoka)Yes. From the perspective of instructors who are professional researchers, what we are doing probably looks like just a mockery, and it really is, but what is important is to have the students learn the process of research. In fact, I received a reaction from the students that they were able to realize how imperfect they were in writing through the process of mutual proofreading. They first thought there was almost nothing to correct in their papers, but they came to realize that there were many points to correct. With regards to peer review, students did not make comments at the beginning. That was because they felt a bit reserved around others and that they were not able to notice mistakes. Once the instructor gave advice on what they should correct, they came to realize what points they should take care of. By the end of the course, it took them quite a long time to peer review, and they were able to give comments to others in detail. I think they were able to broaden their horizons. (Nakahara)They gradually become proficient. (Hiraoka)Yes. (Nakahara)Young graduate students who would like to become faculty members are watching this video. Dr. Hiraoka, you are a frontline researcher and instructor. To end this interview, I would like you to give them some advice, such as what is important or what kind of attitude to take when teaching at universities. (Hiraoka)When you take the significance of Active Learning into consideration, Active Learning requires not only students but also instructors to be actively engaged. (Nakahara)Definitely. (Hiraoka)If the instructor tries to clearly control the class by planning to do this and that in a certain amount of class time, I think the class becomes static. Making a class dynamic and active means that interaction occurs between the students and instructor. In such classes, what the instructor prepared for the class remains unaccomplished or the scenario changes. Since new instructors are not used to delivering classes, they are likely to put everything in order and guide students to accomplish what they planned to do, but they should instead be patient and respond to the students’ reaction without minding to going out of your way. Create your class with your students. In that sense, I think instructors are now required to be able to deal with the situation flexibly. That sounds like a big challenge, but if you change your way of thinking, it means that you can deal with the issues in cooperation with your students instead of trying to drag them to a certain goal. You can roughly set the framework of the class, such as allotting a certain amount of time for this discussion and that activity, and you can flexibly decide what you and your students should do in each activity according to the situation. Being broad-minded enables you to deal with the situation flexibly, so I would like instructors-to-be to take care of that. (Nakahara)That is to make use of things happening might now and create a class with the students just like an improvisation. There is a skill required in dealing with the situation flexibly but that means that you should just enjoy creating a class with your students. (Hiraoka)I think you cannot be open-minded without enjoying the situation. (Nakahara)I see. Thank you for your talk. (Hiraoka)Thank you. (Nakahara)Today’s guest was Dr. Hiraoka. Thank you for watching.
