Example Syllabi:
Goals and motivations as an educator
Since coming to Winona State in 2011, I have been fortunate
to have a similar teaching schedule each year. During fall semesters I teach
one lecture and three four-hour labs associated with Biochemistry I (CHEM400).
Over the years, I have also picked up the ITV section (which interacts with
students at WSU-Rochester) and integrated graduate students into my
undergraduate course to benefit the new Professional Science Master’s program (i.e.
dual-listing my course as CHEM400/500). In the spring, I teach CHEM401, a
lecture, and three sections of the four-hour lab CHEM402. These courses are
continuations of CHEM400/500, and roughly half of the students come from my
fall courses, while others migrate from courses taught by other instructors. I
have also taught the occasional advanced elective and/or service course, but
the majority of my load, and thus the majority of my time, is dedicated to
teaching biochemistry. As biochemistry
is my passion and primary teaching load, one of my goals is to be an effective
biochemistry educator.
In order to understand this goal, I feel you need to know
some of my educational history. I attended the University of Nebraska-Lincoln
for my undergraduate education. While there, I worked in two research
laboratories in the Department of Biochemistry, and I was a teaching assistant
in the Department of Chemistry. I obtained “As” in all of my biochemistry
courses. I graduated with honors and distinction. On paper, I was an excellent
candidate for graduate school and was able to select from several schools
offering fellowships. I selected Iowa State University and in my first semester
I started the graduate series in biochemistry where I learned that I knew
approximately as much about biochemistry as I know about Russian history (which
is to say nothing). When other people make dramatic statements like this they
might mean that they thought they knew all the details about their subject of
choice, but in that first graduate class they were exposed to another, deeper,
level of knowledge. That is not what I mean. In that first graduate course I
realized that “As” in my undergraduate classes meant nothing. I didn’t remember
the most basic information. I essentially had to learn it from scratch which,
paired with the other stressors in graduate school, was a painful experience.
Though I felt ashamed and isolated at the time, I have heard this story many
times from many of my friends and colleagues who have moved on to professional
and graduate programs. The way we learned in some of our upper-division courses
was not effective. It is my overarching
goal as an educator to teach biochemistry in a way that prepares my students
for their post-WSU goals with basic skills and knowledge that they can call
upon at any time. With this motivation, I design my biochemistry courses to
have a high level of student concern, offer multiple opportunities for learning
in a variety of styles, and reinforce new information with previously learned
curriculum in order to support memories.
My current educational philosophy can be summarized in two
statements:
1. Students will be given opportunities to learn and re-learn material prior to formal assessment
2. Students will be required to use and apply the material they learn
In the next sections, I provide
examples of how I pursue excellence in my classroom and evidence that my
efforts are leading to achieving my overarching goal of being an effective
biochemistry educator. Please note that these examples come from my CHEM400-402
courses, which is my primary load during the school year. I have also reflected
on specific aspects of other courses I have taught later in this document.
Students will be given opportunities to learn and re-learn material
prior to formal assessment
Cognitive psychology research has
taught educators a significant amount about the way students learn.
Specifically, follow-up assessments indicate that students “lose” information
at an alarming rate in lecture-based environments [1]. However, reaffirming connections
between information, and continuously re-using information seem to be the best
methods for retaining knowledge [2]. In my classroom I use a variety of methods to maximize
these interactions in order to aid the retention of information learned.
Method 1: Interactive lectures
If you were a student in my
classroom, you would experience a variety of interactions during a typical class
period. These include presenting powerpoint slides or worksheets, taking notes on the slides,
asking/answering questions, small partner activities, large formal group
activities, and group discussions. Student satisfaction with my lectures is
high, with an overall average of 4.56/5.00. Assembled data is available for each set of evaluations
(CHEM400: 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015 CHEM401/402: 2012, 2013, 2014. 2015).
Students participate in various
activities during their time in class. Specific activities, as well as the
assessments paired with these, are linked at the end of this document. During the lecture, I
often stop and ask students to answer a specific question about the content.
Some of these questions are informal, and students are invited to shout answers
to me. Some of these questions are more formal. I call the more formal
questions ‘mini-quizzes’, and during Spring 2013-Spring 2014, I used the
classroom response software TopHat (formerly TopHat Monocle) to acquire and
assess their answers. TopHat is very useful in a 50+ student lecture, as
students must be present to hear the question, must answer the question in a
specific amount of time, and get immediate feedback on the correctness of their
answer. My favorite utility of this
software involves asking a difficult or contentious question, allowing some
discussion over the question, and then allowing students to re-answer the
question for their final credit. Unfortunately, I do not have any direct
assessment of this method because the second answer overwrites the first answer
in my gradebook.
During my time using TopHat, I
asked students to evaluate the perceived utility of the software (Figure 1). While
perceived utility of the software generally increased as I became more
proficient in using it and setting up reasonable grading expectations for it, I
found that it put up a wall between my students and myself. They were answering
questions to a program, not to their instructor. Additionally, while TopHat was
absolutely beneficial in my lecture when 78 students were enrolled, lower
enrollments in later semesters allowed for more one-on-one attention, and I
found TopHat inhibited those interactions. As a result, I discontinued use of
TopHat for the 2014-2015 academic year. I may use it again in the future,
especially as WSU has invested in a site-license for the software, but I would
like to compare my evaluations from the TopHat-using years to the non-TopHat
using year.
Figure 1: Perceived helpfulness of TopHat
software in Biochemistry courses
Method 2: Online quizzes
When I started teaching at WSU, I
was of the opinion that student would remain engaged in the course and learn
more if they had weekly “pop quizzes”. Exams would be high-stakes, but there
would be very few of them. In my first semester, students requested more exams,
and each time I’ve asked students how many exams they would like to have in the
course (ranging from 2-5), they select the highest number of exams. This
indicates to me that students wish to have multiple assessments with less
material on them. One would think that the quizzes would fulfill this request,
however, the students do not appear to rank quizzes as important as exams.
I used in-class quizzes from
F2011-S2013. During F2011-F2012, they were unannounced. Students performed
dismally and reported consistently that they found the quizzes less helpful
than other assessment techniques in my classes. (Table 1) Additionally, their
quiz scores were considerably lower than their average grades in the course
(Table 1). Finally, follow-up questions on exams were not demonstrating that
the in-class quizzes were increasing student learning or understanding.
Table 1: Student achievement and perceptions related to in-class
quizzes from 2011-2013.
Average Score (%)
|
Number of Students
|
Perceived Helpfulness
(1-5)
|
Course Average Grade (%)
|
Perceived Difficulty
(1-5)
|
|
F2011
|
55
|
52
|
3.84
|
82
|
3.30
|
F2012
|
69
|
69
|
3.96
|
82
|
3.34
|
S2012
|
65
|
59
|
4.06
|
81
|
3.30
|
S2013
|
61
|
68
|
3.9
|
78
|
3.47
|
In Fall 2013, I moved my course to
an online auto-graded quiz format. I prepared short-answer, multiple selection,
and multiple choice quizzes that are continuously available to students during
each learning module. Students may take and retake these quizzes as many times
as they feel is necessary. The quiz is autograded, but it does not reveal the
correct answers to them. Also, I deter the fairly
common practice of cheating on online quizzes [3] by making them totally
voluntary, and students receive no credit for completing them. I have
previously incentivized them by including questions directly from the quizzes
in my ‘miniquizzes’ (i.e. TopHat or other response system) in class.
Initially,I questioned the utility of these quizzes, as the average scores were not better than the in-class quiz scores.However, further analysis of how students were using these
quizzes demonstrated that students were usually assessing their initial
understanding, netting them an initial score. Then, students re-took the
quizzes (Fall 2013 had an average of 5 attempts per student), focusing on the
concepts they didn’t understand and skipping questions on which they had
already received 100%. This methodology gave a wide range of final quiz scores
(Fall 2013 10-97%) with an average of 62% of students participating in 10
quizzes. In CHEM401, the optional online quiz model has been available since
Spring 2012. These quizzes differ in format as more analysis is required for
each question, and these long answer questions cannot be autograded by D2L. As
such, students typically take the quiz once to reveal the answers I provide and
compare their answers. Even so, an average of 55% of students choose to use
this learning tool. In CHEM400 and 401 the perceived utility of these quizzes
is 3.40/5.00, indicating that most students do find these helpful. A complete overview of the utility of the optional online quizzes including individual data for each quiz is available in a separate document.
Method 3: Metabolic maps
One of the assignments that is unique
to CHEM401 includes the mapping and interconnections of our metabolic processes.
CHEM401 focuses on learning multiple metabolic pathways that are involved in
energy production and utilization. The textbook focuses on learning these
pathways in individual modules, however, these pathways are closely integrated
in biological systems. The metabolic map assignment requires students to
reproduce not only the metabolic pathways, but the connections between the
pathways. For example, the carbohydrate fructose-1,6-bisphosphate is involved
in the metabolic pathways glycolysis, gluconeogenesis, the pentose phosphate
pathway, sucrose degradation, and starch biosynthesis. However, the book
presents these pathways largely individually without indicating the
interconnections between them. Students must reproduce the pathways, and those
pathways must all connect through a single, central fructose-1,6-bisphosphate.
(Metabolic maps assignment sheet).
Students generally do well on this assignment, with an average score of 89.4% on metabolic maps
created between 2012-2015.
Metabolic maps are due before the
exams, thus forcing students to write out the pathways in practice at least
once. Additionally, exams focus on the energy flow and cooperativity of these
pathways, and this assignment asks students to evaluate and synthesize these
connections prior to the formal assessment. Evaluations indicate this assignment
is very helpful, with an average perceived helpfulness score of 4.42/5.00 from
2012-2015.
Summary:
In my classes, students are
presented with the material in a lecture. During that lecture, they participate
in discussions in large and small groups to facilitate further interaction and
analysis of the material. The students are presented with low-stakes
“mini-quizzes” and interactive learning opportunities to ensure that they
understand the material. Students are provided optional online quizzes to
assess learning and understanding of the material, and they are assigned
projects promoting integration of the material. All of these learning opportunities
are provided before formal examination. Many, if not all of these activities,
provide immediate feedback to aid student self-assessment. Overall, students
find these activities beneficial, continually ranking each above 70% in perceived helpfulness. Further analysis on the effect of my
curriculum and classroom environment on student learning is provided later in
this document.
Students will be required to use and apply the material they learn in my courses
To any educator, this statement
may seem trivial or obvious. Let me restate this with emphasis on the pieces I
find most important: Students will be required to use and apply the material they learn in my courses. In
biochemistry it’s common to give examples of uses of specific facts or
concepts. It is also common to test on those specific examples. However, I want
students to grasp the concepts and then apply them to new situations, which is
what they will be doing in their future careers. To facilitate this, I have
used several methods with varying degrees of success.
Method 1: In-class activities
In my first semester at Winona
State, I taught CHEM400 from 9:30-10:50 twice per week. This long format lends
itself well to in-class activities, and I aimed to be doing 20-60 minute activities
in every class period, with several activities for each topic. It was during this course that I ran into some
difficulties. First, if students didn’t trust that my activities “had a point”,
they wouldn’t do them. Second, if the directions were too convoluted, they
would get bogged down in details and miss the biochemistry lesson. Third,
students need a solid foundation in the knowledge before they can apply the
knowledge effectively. In my end-of-semester assessments, I asked students to
rank how much the in-class activities helped them on a scale of 1-5. Notably,
my first semester activities showed the lowest average score for perceived
helpfulness, and as I learned more about my students and how my students study
and learn, I was able to increase the perceived helpfulness’ of the activities
(Figure 2).
Figure 2: Perceived helpfulness of in-class activities in Biochemistry courses
While I do host interactive
lectures daily, full-formal learning activities focus on topics I felt the
students needed to spend the most time and energy to understand. In CHEM400,
this topic is enzymes and enzyme kinetics. Learning about enzyme kinetics
involves new nomenclature, new units of measurement, and visualization skills,
as most enzymes are completely invisible to the naked eye. In CHEM401, the most
difficult topic are the biosignalling and regulation pathways involved with how
glucose metabolism is controlled in our bodies. As most of my students in my
classroom self-report the desire to enter medical or clinical fields (data acquired from 2011-2015), I feel
that understanding of these processes is quite important for their future
careers. Additionally, I’ve collected data from both CHEM400 and CHEM401
that demonstrates the utility of these full formal activities as compared to
alternate assignments.
- CHEM400: Enzymes
Enzymes are an
important subject in CHEM400, and they have very important applications in the
pharmacological and medical fields. Unfortunately, my experience both here and
at Iowa State University indicates that student
performance on enzyme kinetics assessments is poor. This
observation continued even when I made enzyme and protein function the only
topic on exams, indicating poor comprehension of the topic. Initially
I used a worksheet that required students to work with data to model the
behavior of an enzyme using Excel (Assignment).
This provided some experience in modeling and interpreting data, which was then
assessed on in-class quizzes and exams. In Fall 2013, I instituted the full-formal
learning activity, which consisted of an in-class activity requiring students
to work in teams to build an enzyme with three distinct parts and measure
various parameters of how their enzyme worked (Assignment Sheet, Example Report, Images from 2014 activity).
The final report was submitted as a team and required the modeling of the
acquired data using Excel. When comparing average assessment scores from
classes using the modeling worksheet (F2011-2012) and the full-formal learning
activity (F2013-F2015), a clear increase in exam scores is demonstrated after
completing of the formal learning activity (+6.2%). Additionally, pre- and
post- activity assessments accompanying the full-formal learning activity
demonstrate increase in student knowledge and understanding of enzymes from
immediately prior to the activity (immediately after lecturing on the topic)
and immediately after the activity (Table 3). This is most notable after
addition of a fifth question requiring data analysis in 2014 and 2015.
Table 2: Formal (Exam) assessment results
following institution of learning activities from CHEM400 2011-2014.
Semester
|
Fall 2011-Fall 2012
|
Fall 2013-Fall 2015
|
Activity
|
Modeling worksheet
|
Full-formal activity
|
Average Exam Score
|
68.9%
|
75.1%
|
Table 3: Pre- and Post-activity assessment results 2013-2015
Question
|
Pre-quiz % correct
|
Post-quiz % correct
|
Average increase in score (Post-Pre)
|
|||||
2013
|
2014
|
2015
|
2013
|
2014
|
2015
|
2013-2015
|
||
1
|
65%
|
89%
|
77%
|
91%
|
96%
|
100%
|
19%
|
|
2
|
79%
|
76%
|
63%
|
94%
|
87%
|
96%
|
20%
|
|
3
|
89%
|
76%
|
72%
|
92%
|
91%
|
83%
|
10%
|
|
4
|
82%
|
35%
|
39%
|
85%
|
79%
|
87%
|
32%
|
|
5
|
N/A
|
9%
|
27%
|
N/A
|
60%
|
75%
|
50%
|
|
Most
importantly, a formal, summative assessment administered during CHEM400-401 2013-2015 showed retention and comprehension increased up to 56% on two related
questions from first-day of CHEM400 to last-day of CHEM401 (i.e. school year
retention). (Questions 4 and 5 described later in this document).
Student feedback
on evaluations indicates the perceived helpfulness of the project is generally
positive (3.45/5.00). Several students noted that they particularly enjoyed the
activity under the evaluation prompt “Please share one aspect of teaching
CHEM400 that you feel Dr. Mann does well.”
“Enzyme kinetics project”
“Choosing different activities to help us
learn – made it more exciting”
“Projects/activities/labs were helpful and
fun”
In Fall 2014, I
informally heard from a student who had taken my class in Fall 2013 and was
starting Pharmacy School at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. She thanked me
for providing such effective instruction on this topic:
In Fall 2015, this project was the specific example cited as the reason one of my students nominated me for a National Residence Hall Honorary 'Of the Month' award. This student clearly understood the effort I put into making biochemistry approachable to a variety of different learners, however, I must
note that some negative comments regarding the project were provided under the
prompt “Please share one aspect of teaching CHEM400 that you feel Dr. Mann
should improve upon.”
“The enzyme project was not very clear and
was very confusing”
I strive to make
the directions and expectations as clear as possible (e.g. assignment sheet and
rubric are provided prior to the due date), and I make myself available for 2-3
class periods for work on this project. However, I do believe that part of
learning is the struggle required to completely understand and apply the
information. While many students understand that I am supporting them in this
endeavor, some students remain uncomfortable with the learning process no
matter how much coaching I provide. I believe this full-formal learning
activity is largely a success. I have formatted this activity for submission to Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education and hope to see it
published and utilized in other biochemistry courses.
- CHEM401: Cooperative analysis of blood sugar regulation
Diabetes mellitus
(DM) is a disease most notably characterized by the failure to regulate blood sugar in a normal and productive manner. The incidence of DM is rising in the
United States,
and the Centers for Disease Control predicts 1.5% (up from current rate of 0.8%) of the American population will
be affected by DM by the year 2050 [5]. As most of my students in CHEM401 wish to pursue careers in medically-related fields, I feel strongly students should be exposed to this complex
regulatory process as early in their education as possible.
Understanding the
regulatory processes for blood sugar in the body requires students to know
several pathways in glucose synthesis, storage, and degradation. Understanding
the triggers for regulation also requires a working knowledge of several common
biosignalling mechanisms. This information spans four chapters (179 pages) of
our textbook. It is a large amount of information to compile. In order to start
drawing connections between processes, I give one lecture that distills the
information into its most basic components, during which students are
encouraged to fill out a worksheet that I provide (Link here). One class period later, students form groups of 10-12 to
perform a cooperative learning assignment, which is described in the attached
documentation (Link here). In short,
students role-play specific items in metabolism (enzymes, regulatory hormones,
and signaling proteins) and have to visibly display how the actions of upstream
elements effect downstream processes during normal and aberrant blood sugar
regulation.
The activity is
assessed via a pre- and post-quiz, much like the CHEM400: Enzymes activity. I
have used this activity three times, in 2012, 2014, and 2015 and was pleased with the gains
in student understanding measured in 2012 and 2014 (data not gathered in 2015) (Table 4). Additionally, during the previously
mentioned summative assessment in 2014, students demonstrated a 43% increase in
correct answers on the question associated with this topic (Question 15 discussed later in this document).. I am very excited to continue this
summative assessment and determine learning outcomes for these activities in
the future.
I am very pleased
with these outcomes, however, this is not my most popular activity. This
activity can be quite confusing and difficult for students who have a weak
understanding of the material learned in previous chapters. After both informal
and formal complaints about this activity in 2012, I decided to see if similar
educational gains could be acquired with a less invasive method. Instead of the
cooperative learning activity, I performed the same lecture and assigned the
worksheet as a take-home quiz. Students returned with the worksheet, and
performed small group case studies on normal and aberrant metabolism in which
they had to follow regulatory steps. Worksheets were collected and graded
(average score 78%, which is comparable to pre-cooperative learning assessments
(Table 4)). During the following class period, the same follow-up assessment
utilized in 2012 and 2014 (after cooperative learning activity) was
administered. The class average on the assessment was a dismal 40.3%, while the
unpopular cooperative learning activity nets much greater gains with an average
score of 81.1% (Table 4). This data is quite convincing, and I plan to keep
this activity.
Table 4: Student learning assessments for
blood sugar regulation activities
Year
|
Number of students
|
Pre-quiz average
|
Post-quiz average
|
Cooperative Learning Activity
|
|||
2012
|
59
|
Not graded
|
80.7%
|
2014
|
44
|
70.5%
|
82.0%
|
Alternate Learning Activity (Take-home Worksheet)
|
|||
2013
|
68
|
78%
|
40.3%
|
Method 2: Case studies
In addition to
considerable in-class activities, I also administer two online-only case studies
via D2L discussion boards during CHEM401. CHEM401 course content focuses on
metabolism, and in this course students promote memorization and integration of
the pathways using the previously mentioned metabolic maps. In addition to
learning the pathways, students are asked to consider the effect of disorder of
these pathways in human physiology. They perform this analysis in two case
studies, which are performed in small groups of 6-8 students (Assignment sheet).
I have developed 18 different case studies to prevent overlap and allow cycling
of case studies from year to year. In the first case study, actual medical case
studies are sampled and students must diagnose a real disorder of human
metabolism. As a biochemistry instructor, my interest is in having the students
use the information and interpret it in terms of metabolism. However,
inevitably some groups prefer to use this assignment to ‘hunt down’ analogous
case studies and just regurgitate all the medical findings. This frustrated me
enough to develop a second case study assignment called the “Superhero/Supervillain
Case Study”. Instead of solving real human case studies that can fairly easily
be found online, students are presented with a case about an individual with
superhuman attributes. A change in their metabolism is inevitably the cause of
some of the superhuman abilities, and students must justify how changing the
pathways would allow the superhuman to obtain or support these powers. As an
instructor, I enjoy this case study because it’s not ‘cheatable’, and students
have to demonstrate understanding of the materials used in class. An example case study thread from a previous semester is found here. I think these case studies are good for student formative
assessment because they must consider and reconsider their knowledge when faced
with arguments. Inevitably, students walk away from the case study with a firm
understanding of the material. In the three years I’ve facilitated this
assignment, typically 8 groups are formed per class, and 7 or more groups achieve
the correct answer on the first case study. On the second case study, 5 groups
typically achieve the correct answer, 1-2 groups have well-researched answers
that are not quite correct, and 1-2 groups fail to obtain the correct answer.
Student evaluations indicate that this activity has a fairly strong perceived
helpfulness score (4.00/5.00), and I find that this assignment is incredibly
helpful for me as an instructor as it helps me understand the methods students
are using to learn and analyze material.
Method 3: Laboratory experiments based
on lecture content and student inquiry
In previously years, CHEM400 had a
laboratory component, while the laboratory component for CHEM401 has always been separate
(i.e. CHEM402). In 2016, this will change and both fall and spring courses will have separate labs (CHEM405-409). Since starting at WSU, I have worked to modernize equipment, add variety to
the laboratory modules, and provide lecture-based support for laboratory
experiments. I have worked with my colleagues to edit and improve all of the laboratory modules for CHEM400/402 to be more engaging, low cost, and clear to the students. I have written one entirely
novel laboratory module that has been accepted for publication in the Journal
of Chemical education [5]. I have further involved student inquiry and
hypothesis in the CHEM402. Most of my efforts have been directed at making the
connection between lecture-based learning and lab-based learning more obvious. For
example, in CHEM400 students study enzyme kinetics, build a model enzyme,
evaluate data on their enzyme, and take an exam on enzymes prior to evaluating
enzymes in the laboratory. After students evaluate enzymes in the laboratory,
write a lab report on the enzymes, and take a quiz on the enzymes, they see
enzymes again on their comprehensive final. Students are not given the
opportunity to forget about enzymes, furthermore, if students experienced a
misunderstanding early on in the semester, they are presented with the
information multiple times to allow opportunities for correction. This type of
progression occurs for several topics in CHEM400, including proteins, protein
purification, and carbohydrates. In each case, students must use and apply
lecture-based material to generate and analyze data in lab.
In CHEM402,
facilitating this connection is more difficult, as the students enrolled in lab
may not have had me as their CHEM400 instructor and may not be concurrently
enrolled in CHEM401. While I do refer to material they have previously learned to
refresh their memories, I find that assigning a
prelab in which they must provide two sources worth of background information
and a hypothesis as to the outcome of the laboratory has aided students in
identifying information to aid their success in lab. For example,
students monitor the metabolism of a simple carbohydrate, glucose, during
CHEM402. In order to succeed in this lab, they must remember some basic
structural information from CHEM400, know the basic pathways of glucose
metabolism, and predict the outcomes of this metabolism in fermenting yeast.
After the lab, they must analyze their data and write a report integrating the
background information with the data. Though I have no way to confirm, I would
not be surprised to find that students remember more about glycolysis because
they concurrently enroll in CHEM402 and CHEM401, and thus perform better on the
associated questions during the summative assessment, which demonstrates an
increase of 9-60% correct answers after the completion of the semester (Questions 12-15).
Method 4: Application-based exams and
comprehensive final exams
As a product of
memorization based education, I recognize that memorization in undergraduate
biochemistry is neither good for longevity of knowledge nor understanding of
concepts. As such, I teach students how to solve problems based on information
given (whether mathematically, graphically, or logically) and assess their
learning by providing application based exams. For example, an exam on enzyme
kinetics might require students to model a chemical equation from a paragraph
description of the enzyme function; it might later give them some information
graphically and require students to calculate the Michaelis-Menten (Vmax, Km,
kcat) from the data. In either of these cases, the example is novel to the
student, and they must apply the concepts they have learned previously to solve
this ‘new’ problem.
Students usually
perform poorly on the first exam each semester. However, over the course of the
semester, exam scores increase and they learn to think like scientists (Table 5,
F2011 omitted due to incomparable exam schedule). Additionally, students retain
information; year-long assessment data indicates that students increase
assessment scores by 25-30% over the course of the
semester each semester, indicating an excellent improvement in biochemistry
knowledge (Table 6). Furthermore, students demonstrate less than 15% loss of
knowledge when assessed in April about material learned in fall semester. This
is an incredible statistic, as educational psychologists have demonstrated that
81% of material is usually lost by 28 days post-educational event event [1].
Table 5: Evidence of improved exam scores and continued understanding of concepts in biochemistry
Semester
|
Exam 1
|
Exam 2
|
Exam 3
|
Exam 4
|
Final, Comprehensive
|
F2012
|
68.7
|
75.8
|
69.2
|
77.6
|
70.0
|
F2013
|
66.0
|
73.3
|
81.0
|
80.4
|
66.8
|
F2014
|
73.0
|
78.0
|
71.6
|
74.1
|
73.8
|
F2015
|
61.5
|
73.7
|
72.3
|
69.2
|
69.7
|
Average
|
69.3
|
75.2
|
73.5
|
75.3
|
70.1
|
Exams are inevitably the least popular assessment in my courses,
however, I have considerable evidence that students are learning and retaining
information in my courses. Additionally, two previous students, one working in
industry and one in his second year of pharmacy school, have provided letters
of recommendation for this portfolio. Both discuss at length the benefits my
classes provided (Martinson, Seehusen). In an informal interaction this fall, two students took to
social media with this particularly amusing endorsement of my classes (s/o
stands for ‘shout out’).
Figure 4: Student
feedback on learning achievements in Biochemistry
Final Evidence of Teaching Excellence in Biochemistry:
In the 2013-2014 academic year, I
instituted a formal assessment of student learning in the biochemistry
curriculum. This assessment quiz was built by random selection of multiple
choice questions, one from each covered chapter, from the textbook test bank.
It is important to note that I do not use this test bank at all during the
course; all of my exams are short answer/essay tests. I have students take the
exam three times during the biochemistry series. They take it on the first or
second day of classes, on one of the last days of CHEM400 prior to the final,
and on one of the last days of CHEM401 prior to the fifth exam. When I tabulate
the data, I analyze by question. I represent the data as a percent-change in
scores from December to August (CHEM400), April to December (CHEM401), and
April to August (CHEM400 and CHEM401). I would like to note that in the April to
August analysis, all topics demonstrated increased knowledge via selection of
the correct answer (grey bars). Topics demonstrating minor learning gains are
associated with membrane dynamics and biosignalling (Questions 11 and 12) and
amino acid degradation (Question 20). Question 20 content has never been covered, making it a good control, but it may have been covered in Physiology, which students often
take at the same time. Additionally, students who have a strong understanding
of other degradation pathways may be able to rationalize the answer. In any
case, the topics covered by Questions 11 and 12 merit some consideration, as
learning gains are minimal. Overall assessment outcomes are provided in
tabular form (Table 6).
Figure 5: Average assessment results from two academic years of CHEM400-401.
Table 6: Compiled student assessment outcomes from two academic years of CHEM400-401.
CHEM400
|
CHEM401
|
|
Average % Improvement
|
23.5 ± 6.4
|
51 ± 2.8
|
Students assessed
|
101
|
79
|
In each previous PDR, I have
provided evaluations for each of my courses. These are available via the
following links: F2011, S2102, F2012, S2013, F2013,
S2014, F2014. S2015, F2015. While specific student comments can easily be viewed in
the above linked material, I have noticed two trends that support that I am
providing a solid education in biochemistry. First, when students are asked to
rank the difficulty of CHEM400 and CHEM401 on a scale of 1 (easy) to 5
(impossible), students continually rank these courses on the difficult side of
the spectrum (Table 7).
Table 7: Average Perceived Difficulty for Biochemistry courses
F2011-F2015
CHEM400
|
CHEM401/402
|
3.38 ± 0.06
|
3.47 ± 0.13
|
Despite this statistic, students
continually rank my performance as an instructor high, indicating I am clear in
my expectations and delivery, I provide feedback efficiently, and am
consistently fair. (Figure 6, average scores are provided above corresponding
metric on legend). This indicates that the content is indeed challenging for
the students, but they recognize that I am supporting their learning and
providing a fair assessment of their abilities.
Figure 6: Common instructor evaluation metrics in CHEM400-401 by semesters of teaching
Figure 6: Common instructor evaluation metrics in CHEM400-401 by semesters of teaching
Additionally, in CHEM400 I ask
students to rank my helpfulness and accessibility (Figure 7) on a 5-point
scale. While the average scores are still excellent, there is an apparent trend
in scores over time. Notably, while my helpfulness has increased slightly, my
accessibility has decreased slightly. I find this inverse relationship
interesting, however, I also find it inevitable. In 2011, I had 52 students. In
2012 and 2013, I had 62 and 69 students in this course, respectively. I am
reliably available for students during my 10 office hours per week, and
previously colleagues have commented on the relative busy-ness of my office
hours. I have actually
determined that I cannot have overlap between my research activities and my
office hours, and I have segregated those activities in my schedule in 2013 and
2014. In 2014, CHEM400 experienced a drop in enrollment and a slight increase
in student perceptions of my availability, indicating that this may be related
to student-to-teacher ratio rather than available hours. Again, these numbers
are quite high, and slight changes are not statistically significant in these
cases.
Figure 7: Student perceptions of instructor helpfulness and
accessibility in CHEM400 over time
Reflection on teaching of non-biochemistry curriculum
I have noted that I also instruct other courses occasionally. Specifically, I have instructed CHEM210 (General, Organic, and Biochemistry) as a five-week course in the summer for four summers. I have instructed one section of OR100 for three years. I have instructed the advanced elective CHEM439 (Biochemistry of Drug Metabolism) once, and I have instructed PSM602 (Scientific Ethics) once. Evaluations were completed for CHEM210 (2012, 2013, 2014, and 2015), CHEM439, and PSM602.CHEM210: General, Organic, and Biochemistry is a one-semester survey of chemistry for health science majors, specifically pre-nursing majors. This course is offered both spring and fall in large lecture sections. We offer this course in a five-week session, which is quite exhausting for the students. Additionally, I must note that over 75% of my students work extensively in healthcare during this time. Approximately 25-30% of my summer students are retaking the course after a poor grade during the school year. Approximately 10-20% of the students take the course in the summer to ‘get a jump’ on the next school year.
The goals of the course are to
prepare pre-nursing students for their nursing program courses. Specifically,
pharmacology benefits from a chemistry background. I have interacted with
nursing faculty to understand the needs of the course. It is my understanding
that the nursing program wishes the students to be quite competent in basic
calculations, recognition of acid/base interactions, and basic structural
components of drugs.
In my classroom, you will see a
considerable amount of similar teaching and learning activities that you would
find in my CHEM400-401 sections. I spend more time coaching basic calculations,
as the nursing program is concerned about the student’s proficiency in
calculations. Additionally, I spend a considerable amount of time in lab
developing labs that describe drug interactions,such as the acid/base interactions of Non-Steroidal Anti-inflammatory Drugs(NSAIDS) in the gut and intestine.
Another note I have taken from the
nursing program is the use of remedial learning to gain proficiency. Students
are asked to learn a lot of material very quickly in this summer session of
CHEM210. I allow students to remediate exams in which they have obtained less
than 81%. The remediation process is long, but if performed correctly, it
ensures students understand the errors that they have made. In the initial year
of implementation, the remediation process did exactly that, however in recent
years I have experienced students with a lack of motivation in the classroom,
and unfortunately they do not complete the remediations by the due date.
Students are assessed by four
exams and a cumulative final. In the four years I have taught the class, there
have been few students who have not remediated at least one exam. In 2014, all
students required remediation on at least one exam. However, I have found that
the students who remediate their exams to the maximum score do very well on the
cumulative final. Students who do not remediate their exams to the maximum
score tend to receive low grades on the cumulative final.
It is hard to teach this course in
a 5-week session, however, student evaluations of me as an instructor are not
poor (Figure 8). I
have no experience teaching this course in the 15-week format, nor am I
familiar with the average evaluation of instructors for this format. I can only
try to improve the aspects that students find I need to improve, which previously appeared to be clarity. I would note that I did make considerable effort to improve my clarity in 2015, but we also used a different textbook. The new textbook was considerably more clear and concise.
Figure 8: Instructor evaluation metrics in CHEM210 summer sessions from 2012-2014
CHEM439 Biochemistry of Drug Metabolism is an advanced elective. I have only taught this course once, and I elected to step out of my comfort zone and try to run this course as a seminar. I remember several successful and meaningful seminar courses from my graduate education, but I found this course with this student population did not quite work as a seminar. Students did not come prepared and refused to refresh material on their own. It made meaningful discussion difficult. Final summative assessments from the class demonstrated that students received grades that were inflated when compared to their knowledge level (70% on summative assessment vs. 84% final grade). However, I did project-based learning for the second half of the semester, and I would do that again. Students gave written and oral presentations on the mechanisms and efficacy of drugs in pre-clinical trials. In the future, I would lecture basic drug mechanisms for the first half of the class, give one exam, and base the rest of the course on the projects.
PSM602 Scientific Ethics is a graduate level course that is
part of the Professional Science Master’s program. I designed this course and
had it approved via five departments in the College of Science and Engineering.
It is a hybrid course. Some of the quizzes, reading, and writing occur outside
of class and we meet for 10 hours per semester. These meetings focus on
discussions with area experts in different areas of ethics and industry. Though
the seminar-based approach did not work for my undergraduate advanced elective,
I am finding this approach to be quite appropriate for my graduate students.
In order to gauge learning of
ethical behaviors, students take multiple assessments throughout the semester.
They take an initial exam of ethics knowledge at the beginning of the semester;
some students have more knowledge than others as scores range from 64-92% (Mean
79%) on the 50-question assessment. During the semester they are presented with
reading, quizzes, and experts in conduct, animal protections, human
protections, environmental ethics, data management, and use of controlled
substances. Experts were invited from WSU, Fastenal, Mayo Clinic, Benchmark
Electronics, Minnesota Valley Testing Lab, and Winona County Environmental
Division. On the last day of class, they evaluate case studies. They also take
the ethics test again and write a reflection on what they have learned
throughout the course. Final ethics test scores increase on average from 68 to
86% (+18%). This is especially notable as many students obtained scores above
90% on the pre-test, making gains marginal. I asked for evaluations from the
students via qualtrics, and only 3/8 students completed the evaluation.
OR100 Orientation is a mandatory course for first-semester
freshmen. I volunteered to teach OR100 because I really miss working with
incoming freshmen. This is my third year teaching that course, and it is
always interesting. I have spent a good amount of time learning about the
university in order to help my students find the resources they need. While I
have very little control over the curriculum for this course, I can attest that
I try to be welcoming and helpful while planning activities that coincide with the university’s goals for this course.
While participation in each class is ‘required’, any student with a keen eye
for points can see that they could miss almost every class and still obtain a
passing grade if they did the homework and projects. Even so, the students come
to class and seem to enjoy it! Each year I routinely see >90% attendance. Additionally, students write
reflection letters to me at the end of the semester, and I serve as a contact
point for them if they need anything in the future. I have received several
heartfelt letters and e-mails indicating that I am a helpful, welcoming
resource for them.
“Honestly
orientation was one of my favorite classes… My favorite part though was the
energy. All us students knew we weren’t going to be given some boring lecture
or given a five-page essay when we walked through the doors, so everyone was in
good spirits. We also got to play games and interact with each other, which
helped a lot. It was a great time to just relax and get to know a few people
going through the same work you are.”
“The one thing that I found helpful with
this class was that you helped us out with a lot of stuff that I had questions
about. Like scheduling and classes and different things like that. Thanks for
being such a great orientation professor. I feel like you were one of the best
most helpful ones!!!”
“Orientation 100 was one of the most helpful classes that I have taken
for many reasons. The first reason is that it helped me with useful tips on D2L
and homework/study tips that I use every day. Another reason that it was a very
helpful class is because of all the friends that I was able tom make. It helped
me to feel more ingrained at campus, and it allowed the transition from home to
college life a lot easier.”
Summary of Teaching Excellence in Non-Biochemistry Curriculum
In reflection of methods for teaching non-biochemistry
curriculum, I can identify three major themes for success:
·
Be open, helpful, and receptive to student needs
·
Understand the student’s goals and motivations
·
Identify the most important aspects of student
learning and keep that content rigorous
Though my experience teaching courses outside of my
expertise has been minimal, I have sought out new experiences (e.g. OR100 and
PSM602) and aim to continue to learn from and improve upon my techniques.
[1]
Pauk, W. How to Study in
College, 6th Ed.; Houghton Mifflin Company: Boston, 1997.
[2] Karpicke, J.D.; Roediger, H.L. Repeated retrieval
during learning is the key to long-term retention. J. Mem. Lang. 2007, 57, 151-162.
[3] Rowe, N. C. Cheating in Online Student
Assessment: Beyond Plagiarism. Online J. Dist.
Learn. Admin. 2004, 7 (2).
[4] Boyle, J. P. et. al. Projection of the year
2050 burden of diabetes in the US adult population: dynamic modeling of
incidence, mortality, and prediabetes prevalence. Pop. Health Met. 2010, 8 (29).
[5] Mann, F.M. Identification and Analysis of
Bioactive Components of Fruit and Vegetable Products. J. Chem. Ed. 2015, Articles
ASAP doi: 10.1021/ed500309y
Teaching Excellence At-A-Glance
All
activities are since the start of my appointment in August 2011
For
a full list of all scholarly activities, see my CV
Courses delivered:
·
OR100
·
CHEM210
·
CHEM400
·
CHEM401
·
CHEM402
·
CHEM439
·
PSM602
Courses developed:
·
PSM602
Learning activities
developed:
CHEM210
CHEM400
·
EnzymeKinetics II (full-formal) (Submitted to BAMBED)
CHEM401
New laboratory modules
developed and executed:
CHEM210
CHEM400
CHEM401
·
Antioxidant content of fruits and vegetables (Published in J. Chemical Education)
Course and Instructor
assessments:
·
Instructor assessments result in rankings above
4/5 on student assessments of delivery, expectations, accessibility,
helpfulness, feedback, efficiency, and fairness in CHEM400 and/or 401 (Mean:
4.6 ± 0.15 across all parameters)
·
Instructor assessments result in rankings about
4/5 on student assessments of clarity, expectations, efficiency, and fairness
in CHEM210 (Mean: 4.42 ± 0.28 across all parameters)
·
Efficacy of student retention results in 25%
knowledge gain per semester and >80% retention when assessed 4 months post delivery.
Back to Cover Page
Next: Criterion 2
Back to Cover Page
Next: Criterion 2
