Projects Honored With Prestigious Capstone Award
On October 17, the Boston University College of General Studies celebrated the outstanding students who received awards for the Capstone projects they completed last May. The Capstone project is a 50-page research paper that CGS students complete during their sophomore year. Students draw on two years of interdisciplinary studies, working as a team to synthesize data into a meaningful whole—making a proposal or reaching a verdict and justifying their conclusions through their research. The Capstone award is given annually to the group of students who present the best overall Capstone paper and defense on each team. It is the highest honor bestowed upon a College of General Studies student for an academic project.
TEAM S: State Committee of Data Protection–Strategic Plan and Policy Recommendation
The winning Capstone group for Team S (Bryce Filippazzo, David Hernandez, Rowan John, Alex Kopaliani, Raman Mathur, Daniel Santos, Ansel Weng) tackled the American Data Privacy and Protection Act, which has faced considerable opposition since it was introduced in 2022. This group of experts on data privacy focused first on the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and provided a framework for a model program that considers the best components of existing successful policies. With solid research and a keen understanding of the opposition, the group presented a clear, detailed set of suggestions. The oral defense component was lively and consistently excellent. In addition, the group’s research experience was enhanced by a coincidence—in April a Joint Committee of the Massachusetts State Legislature was holding a public hearing on this very issue. Several members of the group attended the discussions and learned firsthand how their Capstone research reflected real-life political action.
TEAM T: Restorative Justice: Heal the Hallways
Team T’s winning Capstone group (Matteo Arcuri, Evelyn Cahill, Raghav Ladda, Estella Martin, Dani Patterson, Joseph Royzman, Ryan Vandal) took on the issue of restorative justice in the public-school setting. Their capstone focused on Brockton Public Schools, a local school system that recently experienced a crisis in which the state was asked to send in the National Guard. The members of this group thoroughly researched the school system in order to have a clear understanding of the issue and the root of the problems they were facing. Subsequently, they constructed a multi-pronged approach that aimed to achieve reform in a compassionate yet practical manner. A major feature of their plan was to reform the current approach and to offer a solution that “fosters dignity, growth, and community” for the students of Brockton Public Schools. They were able to point to local models that had implemented portions of their recommendations successfully, showing the clear feasibility of their plan. Further, they pointed out that implementing this plan would not cost the school system more money, in fact, would result in a net savings for the stressed public-school budgets. Through the paper, as well as a multimedia component and pitch presentation of their approach, they clearly communicated both the problem and a workable, empathetic solution.
TEAM U: The Use of Psychedelics in Therapy
Team U’s winning project was entitled “Use of Psychedelics in Therapy”. The students (Ariana Beck, Jacob Coyman, An Dinh, Charles Fletcher, Lauren LaGasse, Mikyla Lucas, Lyndsay Lynch) researched the potential medical benefits of the drugs Psilocybin, LSD and MDMA. They considered the legal, scientific, social and moral ramifications of the therapeutic use of these substances and made recommendations for further study. The professors were very impressed not only by the project itself but by the oral defense, during which it seemed that every member of the group could confidently answer any question posed. They were a cheerful, fun group and worked very well together. Their writing, editing, research and work ethic were all top-notch.
TEAM V: Defense Organization for Research Innovation, and Trade for Semiconductors
Team V’s winning Capstone paper—written by the Defense Organization for Research Innovation, and Trade for Semiconductors, or DORITOS (Robbie Blumenthal, Leo Janowitz, Dante Martiniello, Max Murphy, Sylvia Onuoha, Natalie Rosales, Briar Tomcho)—tackled one of the most urgent problems facing the United States: how to restore its semiconductor manufacturing capability to the point required to maintain its status as the world’s leading economic power and guarantee its national security. It is by any measure a daunting problem whose solution must account for the complexity of semiconductors and their manufacturing process, their critical role in high tech products, whether civilian or military, the determination of the People’s Republic of China to prevent that restoration from happening, and the fact that the United States has allowed its manufacturing prowess to deteriorate for decades. DORITOS crafted a comprehensive policy which included a major program for workforce development and STEM education, a program to encourage the immigration of skilled semiconductor professionals, greater investment in long-term research and development to develop the next-generation fabrication capacity, and domestic mining to break the PRC’s stranglehold on rare earth elements. This group delivered a very strong oral defense. According to the professors, every member demonstrated a solid understanding of the paper and was prepared to respond to probing and often tough questions about their evidence and policy. They were not intimidated when challenged and consistently responded as a team, whether reinforcing what their colleagues had said or moving on to another relevant point. “This was genuinely an excellent Capstone and well deserving of this award,” the professors said.
TEAM W: Restoring Justice: The Legacy of Uranium Mining and the Path to Recovery
Team W’s winning group (Henri Bano, Santiago Diaz Tovar, Jaqueline Gonzalez Duarte, Gisel Guerrero, Sam Modeas, Aadit Pande, Jayden Park), combined a discussion of uranium mining for nuclear weapons—in the context of the history of the Cold War—with the status of the Navajo as a marginalized group who bore the extremely negative effects of uranium mining on ground water and drinking water. This capstone paper worked out a plausible remediation plan. The group also focused on the issuance of bonds in New Mexico to help finance this plan. In the absence of their proposal—which involved the removal of contaminated soil and the placement of special water filtration devices in the area—the members of this group worried that the problem of uranium in ground water would persist indefinitely. Their proposal not only accounted for uranium removal, but also the construction of several community health centers, and suggested leasing land to solar and wind farms to generate electricity and revenue to support bond repayment. The group also worked well together in their meetings with the professors and their peer evaluations were strong.
TEAM Y: Diplomacy or War: A Comparative Analysis of Military and Diplomatic Approaches to the Iranian Nuclear Threat
According to Western intelligence estimates, Iran can build a nuclear weapon in less than a year. This Capstone group (Arsh Bahl, Nikolas Beltz, Elizabeth Dallaire, Delara Farzin, Hunter Harris, Sarah Otis, Thomas Raymond, Nicolai Tarason) examined the options available to the United States to prevent this outcome. Styling themselves as a task force created by the National Security Council, the group divided itself in half to debate whether the United States should take a military or diplomatic approach to stop the Iranian nuclear program. The group started with the shared premises of background history, what is currently known about the Iranian nuclear program, and the rationale for why Iran must not be allowed to become a nuclear power. Then, the two sides of the task force laid out their evidence and reasoning for opening negotiations, on the one hand, and launching surgical airstrikes against Iran’s nuclear facilities on the other. While this Capstone is well-researched, well-written, and comprehensive, what stood out most about the project, according to professors, was the level of sophistication. Detailed analyses of how each side would play out in practice meant they created both a conversation between the two sides and also reached a logical final decision. The knowledge of the topic displayed in the Capstone paper and in the oral defense made clear these students had become experts on this global flash point.