Barrels XXXIV meeting report: Barrels goes virtual.

Objective: To summarize the state of research in the whisker-to-barrel sensorimotor system based on presentations at the Barrels meeting.Methods: Host the 34th annual Barrels meeting was hosted virtually due to the ongoing Covid-19 pandemic.Results: The Barrels meeting annually focuses on the latest advances in the rodent sensorimotor research. The keynotes featured talks on advanced imaging techniques and the role microglia play in shaping neural circuits. The thematic presentations focused on the role of neocortical layer I, neural control of navigation and locomotion and finally on the utility of psychedelic drugs to study perception. The invited speakers were complemented by submitted short talks and poster presentations from the attendees.Conclusions: The 34th Annual Barrels meeting provided a critical review of the state of the field.

Barrels XXXII meeting report: whiskers in the windy city.

The 32nd Annual Barrels meeting was hosted at the Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine in Chicago, Illinois on October 17th and 18th, 2019. The annual meeting brings together researchers who utilize the rodent whisker-to-barrel system as a means to understand cortical function and development. This year's meeting focussed on social behaviours, development and cerebellar functions within the barrel system and beyond.

Barrels XXXI comes to the inland empire.

The 31st annual Barrels meeting was held on the campus of the University of California, Riverside on the first two days of November, 2018. The meeting focuses on the whisker to cortical barrel pathway and the systems it impacts. This year's meeting focussed on the neural mechanisms of motor control, the functions of higher order thalamic nuclei and adaptable perception and decision-making.

"C.R.E.A.T.E."-ing Unique Primary-Source Research Paper Assignments for a Pleasure and Pain Course Teaching Neuroscientific Principles in a Large General Education Undergraduate Course.

A large (250 registrants) General Education lecture course, Pleasure and Pain, presented basic neuroscience principles as they related to animal and human models of pleasure and pain by weaving basic findings related to food and drug addiction and analgesic states with human studies examining empathy, social neuroscience and neuroeconomics. In its first four years, the course grade was based on weighted scores from two multiple-choice exams and a five-page review of three unique peer-reviewed research articles. Although well-registered and well-received, 18% of the students received Incomplete grades, primarily due to failing to submit the paper that went largely unresolved and eventually resulted in a failing grade. To rectify this issue, a modified version of the C.R.E.A.T.E. (Consider, Read, Elucidate hypotheses, Analyze and interpret data, Think of the next Experiment) method replaced the paper with eight structured assignments focusing on an initial general-topic article, the introduction-methods, and results-discussion of each of three related peer-review neuroscience-related articles, and a final summary. Compliance in completing these assignments was very high, resulting in only 11 INC grades out of 228 students. Thus, use of the C.R.E.A.T.E. method reduced the percentage of problematic INC grades from 18% to 4.8%, a 73% decline, without changing the overall grade distribution. Other analyses suggested the students achieved a deeper understanding of the scientific process using the C.R.E.A.T.E. method relative to the original term paper assignment.

Pleasure and pain: teaching neuroscientific principles of hedonism in a large general education undergraduate course.

In a large (250 registrants) general education lecture course, neuroscience principles were taught by two professors as co-instructors, starting with simple brain anatomy, chemistry, and function, proceeding to basic brain circuits of pleasure and pain, and progressing with fellow expert professors covering relevant philosophical, artistic, marketing, and anthropological issues. With this as a base, the course wove between fields of high relevance to psychology and neuroscience, such as food addiction and preferences, drug seeking and craving, analgesic pain-inhibitory systems activated by opiates and stress, neuroeconomics, unconscious decision-making, empathy, and modern neuroscientific techniques (functional magnetic resonance imaging and event-related potentials) presented by the co-instructors and other Psychology professors. With no formal assigned textbook, all lectures were PowerPoint-based, containing links to supplemental public-domain material. PowerPoints were available on Blackboard several days before the lecture. All lectures were also video-recorded and posted that evening. The course had a Facebook page for after-class conversation and one of the co-instructors communicated directly with students on Twitter in real time during lecture to provide momentary clarification and comment. In addition to graduate student Teaching Assistants (TAs), to allow for small group discussion, ten undergraduate students who performed well in a previous class were selected to serve as discussion leaders. The Discussion Leaders met four times at strategic points over the semester with groups of 20-25 current students, and received one credit of Independent Study, thus creating a course within a course. The course grade was based on weighted scores from two multiple-choice exams and a five-page writing assignment in which each student reviewed three unique, but brief original peer-review research articles (one page each) combined with expository writing on the first and last pages. A draft of the first page, collected early in the term, was returned to each student by graduate TAs to provide individual feedback on scientific writing. Overall the course has run three times at ful or near enrollment capacity despite being held at an 8:00 AM time slot. Student-generated teaching evaluations place it well within the normal range, while this format importantly contributes to budget efficiency permitting the teaching of more required small-format courses (e.g., freshman writing). The demographics of the course have changed to one in which the vast majority of the students are now outside the disciplines of neuroscience or psychology and are taking the course to fulfill a General Education requirement. This pattern allows the wide dissemination of basic neuroscientific knowledge to a general college audience.