Independent Milton Scientists

Every year, Milton students, usually in Classes I or II, find their imaginations and intellects so fired they elect to do an independent study in science. This winter we caught up with four of those students: Wiley Caine, Kathryn Evans, Amanda Faulkner and Hannah Gallo, all Class of 2006.

Although their projects are different, all four students share common ground when they speak of science. They point to particular moments when science took hold of their thinking. For Hannah, that moment was the research topic she did on sustainable forestry at the Maine Coast Semester. She remembers making over 80 phone calls and conducting more than 20 face-to-face interviews as part of her research. “You became devoted to your topic.” Her presentation of her findings to the rest of the school was “a big pivotal moment. I had never applied myself that much; I had never known so much about a topic before. It felt good.” Wiley’s inspiration started at Milton in Tony Domizio’s Methods in Scientific Research class, which “really got me into inquiry,” Wiley says. Coupled with his family’s longtime interest in environmental matters, Wiley’s inquiry led to research on environmentally sound buildings. Amanda’s curiosity about fish farming grew straight out of her experience in California this past summer as Milton’s S.E.A. Scholar (an opportunity provided by the Roger Hallowell ’28 Memorial Fund). There she found the study of marine life so fascinating that she changed her Milton course schedule to include an independent project on fish farming. Kathryn has lived her whole life “across the street from water,” so she has had a lifelong curiosity about marine life. On any given day, she says, “you can find me in hip waders mucking around in the marshes.” Two Milton experiences led to her project of dissecting marine organisms: the dogfish dissection in Marine Biology and her participation in the Blue Lobster Bowl marine science competition at MIT. The only Class II student on the Milton team, Kathryn found the competition eye-opening: “There I realized the extent of marine science. I wanted to learn more.”

All four note the support they have felt from the Milton science faculty. Science teachers passing through the labs will invariably stop to ask them what they are working on. They can become so excited about a student’s research that they leave pertinent articles or books in that student’s mailbox. “It’s contagious,” says Kathryn. “The faculty have such a personal admiration for science that it’s infectious. They’re so willing to help you foster your own passion.” Wiley concurs, “You learn that science is collaborative. People get invested in what you are doing.”

The Milton science department spawned the habits of mind that have helped guide these students in their research. The department inculcates a healthy skepticism in its students. Nothing is certain in science; everything demands fresh, independent, and open-minded scrutiny. “Teachers encourage you to question, to discover for yourself,” says Kathryn. “Test it. Figure out why it worked.” “I love the science department,” declares Hannah. DYOs (the Do Your Own research projects that are a staple of Milton’s science courses) significantly shaped Amanda’s way of thinking. “You had to figure things out yourself. You were really on your own. I liked that.” In Environmental Science, Wiley learned that environmental science, and by extension, all science, “is global, not simple. You see more and more connections as you go on. You learn that nothing exists in isolation.”

Each of these students is engaged in a seminal Milton experience based in science. Wherever their careers take them, their intense and early connection with the scientific process will affect the sophistication and skill they can apply to decoding their world. It will affect what kind of leaders they are likely to become.

Amanda, for instance, is interested in the social science of science. She began exploring marine policy and maritime history in her U.S. history paper on the Barbary Wars. She has investigated the economics as well as the science of fish farming. She understands, through first-hand research, the challenge in balancing economics and conservation. Scientists have “all the facts, but it is simply not possible to do all that the facts tell us to do.” Amanda may pursue a combined major of environmental policy and economics.

After a semester of dissecting squids, skates, rays, and mussels in order to compare the evolution of different organisms in phyla, Kathryn might continue her study of marine organisms. She is fascinated by the giant squid and by the as-yet-undiscovered creatures of the oceans’ deepest waters; she could see herself following a career of “conservation and discovery” where, after finding these creatures, she works to preserve their environment. She could also envision a life of rescuing stranded marine life while working for an organization like the Cape Cod Straining Network.

She will work to increase public awareness of “the vastness of the water around us. Similar to our ignorance about space, we don’t know what we don’t know. We have to connect people to the effects of global warming, glacier recession and water pollution.” In short, she sees the “drastic” need to bring understanding of science to everybody.

Wiley calls his independent study—a full proposal for building an environmentally sound science building at Milton—“a culminating science experience.” He has observed that “the social action part of it” grabs him. “Talking with people who have the same passion (for environmentalism) that I do has been great.” He has talked intensively with LEED architects, town officials, science teachers, administrators, and the director of the Charles River Watershed Association. Wiley has learned that science “does not end, nor does it begin, in the classroom.” The very uncertainty that must lie at the heart of science makes it difficult for scientists to score points in the arena of public policy. “When a politician asks, ‘Do you know absolutely?’ any good scientist will say ‘no,’ even if he believes it or can show it. It’s an art form to communicate science at that level; scientists who can hold their own with pols are rare. I will be interested to see when science and politics really collide in my life. In fact, it would be amazing to combine the two.”

Hannah’s work includes three related studies on forestry. In the fall she studied primary and secondary growth in a 225-square-meter plot near the Lower School. This winter, through the University of New Hampshire, she is investigating ultraviolet rays and ozone depletion as indicated by white pines. Finally, this spring she researches sustainable forestry in Massachusetts. External factors have played significant parts in each phase of her studies—land development changed secondary growth patterns in the plot; numerous human factors have led to ozone depletion; sustainable forestry is as much a matter of policy as science. Hannah is gravitating toward environmental law. “Public policy is where I can make the difference. Many people are better at science than I am. Law allows me to use my ability to persuade. I can help make things happen that will use and aid science.” Communicators who know science, she feels, will need to help the public navigate and understand an increasingly complex world. “There’s theoretical physics, chaos theory, the theory of everything. Is it ever real? You can’t test it. Then you have cloning and the manipulation of DNA. Nanotechnology. It’s uncharted territory and people are scared. More and more people are reactionary about science. They have half-formed gut feelings they can’t suppress.” Hannah also notes the uneasy relationships among science, religion, and morality. On the one hand, “science and religion need to be separated, because science cannot function fully in the shadow of moral implications.” At the same time, environmental science, Hannah’s favorite field, “is an interesting mix of morals and efficient science.” Reconciling these forces is “one of the biggest things I struggle with.” This dynamic tension may animate her adult life.

These four highly energized, thoughtful, pragmatic seniors are not at all afraid of the hard questions, and have become exactly the sort of bold, knowledgeable, clear-eyed thinkers our science department hopes to produce.

Rod Skinner ’72

 

Back to Magazine