Popular book and move are incorporated into an unusual geology classroom
activity.
Bill Simpkins says he can't take credit for the idea.
"A good friend of mine at Ohio State has used this particular case
in a hydrogeology course for a few years," the associate professor
of geological and atmospheric sciences said.
And although the Ohio State class utilizes students from that campus’ law
school to give it a more formal setting, Simpkins wanted to see if A
Civil Action could be incorporated in his hydrogeology class.
A Civil Action is a 1995 book by Jonathan Harr about a toxic tort
lawsuit brought by Woburn, Mass., residents in 1982, charging that three
companies (W.R. Grace, Beatrice Foods and Unifirst Corp.) had allowed the
solvent TCE (trichloroethylene) to leak into groundwater and be drawn in
Woburn city wells.
The landmark environmental case was tried in 1986 and used expert testimony
by famous hydrogeologists to prove or disprove that the companies could
have contributed to the wells' contamination. The plaintiffs alleged that
the TCE had contributed to increased instances in leukemia cases among Woburn
children, which ultimately led to the death of several young children.
The book was later made into a movie starring John Travolta.
"When I first read the book it occurred to me pretty quickly that the
basic concepts dealt with in the case could be integrated into a senior-based
course on hydrogeology (the branch of the geological sciences which is concerned
with the character, source, occurrence, movement, availability and use of
water, particularly groundwater)," Simpkins said. "But we had
to use in such a way that it not only got the students to read the book,
but to explore the technical aspects of the case."
Two years ago, Simpkins used A Civil Action in the class and assigned
individual students characters in the book.
"The book is an easy read. It's unusual to read non-fiction novel in
a technical science course dominated by physics and differential equations,
but you can pick up right away what is happening. Because of that we had
some nice discussions on the trial and it worked real well," he said.
Simpkins still wanted to try something a little more extensively with the
book. After taking a sabbatical last fall, He decided to include the book
again in the four-credit Geology411/511 course last fall. Now instead of
just discussing the trial and its technical aspects in class, the class
would actually recreate the trial.
"Not only did I want to have students integrate the knowledge that
they have gained in the class and practice working in teams, but also to
provide them the experience in presenting technical information in a courtroom
setting," he said.
Students in the senior-laden course were divided into two groups, one representing
the plaintiffs and the other the companies being sued. They were given three
weeks to prepare the case for a mock trial, which was held in December just
before finals.
"After reading the book they can see how the testimony was correctly
or incorrectly used to make key points," Simpkins said. "The case
also highlighted the problem of using scientific experts to unravel a complex
hydrogeologic problem for essentially a lay jury."
The trial involved presentation of evidence by "expert" student
witnesses that attempted to prove the companies did or did not contaminate
the groundwater in the well fields. The students assumed the identities
of real characters in the case.
The students in the class argued their case in front of a seven-person jury
consisting of primarily sophomore students in Geology 100.
"It was really a great learning experience for the students,"
Simpkins said. "It was exciting to see how anxious they were to show
what they had learned in the course about hydrogeology and how it was all
relevant to this particular case."
Simpkins said the students' passion for environmental issues made the mock
trial work.
"Overall this class had the personality that was necessary to make
this type of interaction work," he said.
In the original landmark environmental case documented in A Civil Action,
all parties eventually settled out of court and no one was ultimately held
responsible for the groundwater contamination or the leukemia effects.
That wasn't the case with the Iowa State civil action.
"Although the case was settled out of court in the actual trial, our
jury found that the companies were at least partly responsible for polluting
the groundwater," Simpkins said.
