|
Teaching: Curriculum Samples Biology 211:
Principles of Biology, offered every fall (co-taught with another
Biology instructor) Course Evolution Statement Since my last review, this Biology Degree core course remained largely unchanged until Fall 2004. Between 1997 and 2004, I co-taught this course with Dr. Turner; my lectures covered weeks 1-2 (biochemistry/macromolecules), and weeks 5-8 (cell division, genetics, molecular biology). This student-dubbed weed-out course, however, has always been challenging for the following reasons: (1) increasing science enrollment always exceeds available space - which has resulted in our accepting 5-10 overloads every year, with initial class totals in excess of 100; (2) less well-prepared freshmen who lack appropriate high school science training - which has resulted in ongoing retention problems and increasing efforts to provide remediation services; and (3) my desire to implement lab changes, including developing a DNA/molecular biology lab (to enhance mastery of this traditionally difficult topic) and exploring alternative lab assessment approaches based on anecdotal student feedback regarding team notebooks (i.e. that they are confusing and ineffective for individual mastery/retention). Indeed, I was impressed by previous/1997 accreditation reports that, in fact, suggested team lab assignments were non-ideal and more individual work would better serve our students. Given that 211 pre-registration reached 120 by mid-summer 2004, it was finally decided to add another lab section (which I took over), partially addressing point (1) above. Dr. Galvan, my new co-instructor for Fall 2004, was also interested in point (3). Consequently, several course structure and materials issues were undertaken in Fall 2004. Course Materials Evolution Statement Over the latter half of the summer (with no salary support for this purpose), I revised all lab materials with an emphasis on simplifying team assignments and designing more individual assignments (Dr. Galvan provided input and used all these new materials). I also designed a new DNA/molecular biology lab to give the students more hands-on experience with biotechnology (DNA isolation from their own cheek cells followed by gel-based analysis) and central dogma (replication, transcription, translation) manipulatives and problems. The implementation of this new lab, which required the concomitant condensation of 2 previously separate evolution labs, was carried out by both Kelly Shipley (my research/education assistant) and I. Dr. Galvan and I also co-developed a new individual writing assignment about current cancer research as a way to make the existing cell division lab more relevant. Half a dozen students in my lab openly said it was one of the most interesting and meaningful projects they had done. I also facilitated the selection, design and/or purchase of a significant number of new manipulatives for the cell division lab so students could better model mitosis and meiosis. Although Dr. Galvan and I had planned to incorporate new digital microscopy techniques into our revised cell biology lab, ongoing computer service/access problems prevented this from happening. Finally, I worked with our lab preparator to improve what has been a temperamental and frustrating photosynthesis exercise; this included researching and facilitating the purchase/construction of several pieces of new equipment. I also effectively administered lab management all term: photocopying and distributing all handouts for Dr. Galvan and I, maintaining the class lab website (which included images, data, and keys), and served as the only 211 instructor working with the lab preparator on all new ordering and set-up issues. In addition to lab, I also made significant lecture revisions given that Dr. Galvan and I effectively split the course in half - with her taking the first portion (i.e. including what had been my biochemistry lectures) and me taking the second (i.e. developing new lectures in molecular evolution). In updating old lectures and/or developing new lectures, I also used departmental feedback (stimulated by our 2004 retreat) to make several revisions to my genetics and molecular biology lectures. These included more problem solving exercises in class, covering representative genetic diseases that illustrated different inheritance patterns and specific cell structures/proteins, and providing more relevant extensions of what seem - to many students - immaterial concepts (e.g. making connections between telomeres, cloning and aging in my replication lecture; making connections with real-world epidemics by adding influenza/HIV polymerase error rates to my mutation/evolution lecture). Most time-consuming of all, however, was the conversion of ALL my lectures to Powerpoint given that 211 had - owing to its new size - been relocated to gigantic Smith Hall. To address ongoing remediation issues regarding improving retention and study skills, Kelly Shipley and I took over Dr. Turner's Peer-Led Team Learning (PLTL) program. Although I developed new problem-based curricula and met with some leaders during the term, Kelly did - by far - the majority of resource development and management under my direction. In addition to PLTL activities, I also ran two hour-long problem sessions per week, open to any student who wanted assistance with my lectures or problem worksheets. Although, Fall 2004 211 was fairly successful, I found that it was much harder to come in halfway through the term - with students already showing exhaustion and burn-out (case in point: less than 20 students attended most of my problem sessions, half the numbers than in previous years). Some 211-related improvement ideas that I, and Dr. Galvan, have discussed and/or shared at the departmental level include increasing 211 credit to 5 (slowing the pace and adding more in-class problem sessions, including mandatory PLTL support/involvement for all students); reducing 211 content (with credits held at 4); developing a placement test (to encourage poorly-prepared students to take the 100-series for at least 1 term), shifting content in the 200-series (i.e. moving the cell/molecular portion to the second or third term), and starting the 200-series later (i.e. winter, with a chemistry pre-requisite). While all these ideas are useful, I particularly applaud campus-wide efforts to better screen incoming freshmen using some form of a GPA/SAT-based cut-off. There truly is no point in accepting everyone if the outcome is going to be the level of mutual frustration that is typified by the Biology 211 experience. Provided Curricula Samples 2005 Course Syllabi - Lecture and Lab 2005 Beyond Mendel Lecture (Powerpoint and Student Outline) 2005 Population Genetics Lecture (Powerpoint and Student Outline) 2005 Central Dogma Worksheet (used for PLTL and class) 2005 Cell Division Laboratory Exercise and Cancer Research Paper 2005 Central Dogma/DNA Laboratory Exercise, Worksheet, and Results Images |