Converting Advanced Lab Courses to Research Collaborations

Return to search results | New search

Title of Abstract: Converting Advanced Lab Courses to Research Collaborations

Name of Author: Douglas Chalker
Author Company or Institution: Washington University
Author Title: Associate Professor
PULSE Fellow: No
Applicable Courses: Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Bioinformatics, Cell Biology, Genetics, Microbiology, Plant Biology & Botany, Virology
Course Levels: Upper Division Course(s)
Approaches: Changes in Classroom Approach (flipped classroom, clickers, POGIL, etc.), Mixed Approach
Keywords: Classroom Research CURE Survey Advanced Laboratory Faculty development active inquiry

Name, Title, and Institution of Author(s): Sarah Elgin, Washington University in St Louis

Goals and intended outcomes of the project or effort, in the context of the Vision and Change report and recommendations: Engaging students in authentic research experiences improves persistence and success in STEM majors and careers. Participation in research is also correlated with improved critical thinking and deeper conceptual understanding of science. To provide as many research opportunities as possible, most biology laboratory courses are now structured as investigative experiences in which students undertake original, collaborative research projects.

Describe the methods and strategies that you are using: Biology Department Faculty are encouraged to incorporate research projects based on their own research interests into the lab courses that they teach. The success of this approach by a few has encouraged other faculty to develop new courses or redesign previously existing ones in this manner. Almost all current Biology laboratory offerings have investigative components. Class-based, original research experiences encompassing a broad range of subjects (e.g. bioinformatics, molecular and cell biology, biochemistry, immunology and ecology) are now available to a large percentage of our biology majors. Some inquiry-based modules were designed by graduate or post-doctoral teaching assistants, which provided important professional development for this next generation of educators. In Prof. S.C.R. Elgin’s bioinformatics lab (Biology 4342), students are provided a ~40kbp segment of DNA sequence from an ongoing genome project and are asked to suggest needed finishing sequencing and then annotate the region. In Prof. D.L. Chalker’s cell biology lab (Biology 3492), students functionally characterize their own unstudied gene predicted from the genome sequence of the model ciliate Tetrahymena. Students clone their chosen gene, make and describe the localization of a fluorescent protein fusion to the gene’s coding region among other studies.

Describe the evaluation methods that you used (or intended to use) to determine whether the project or effort achieved the desired goals and outcomes: In these courses, student data are used to update scientific databases and have been distributed through research publications, with enrolled students acknowledged or recognized as authors, demonstrating that students in class investigative labs can contribute novel research findings (2-5). With professors teaching closely aligned with areas of research interest, they are intellectually engaged, benefit in a tangible manner from the time investment, and are better able to communicate their passion for science. As judged by teaching evaluations and exit surveys, these courses are among students’ favorites from among our offerings. Assessment data collected over four years (n=37) using the Classroom Undergraduate Research Experience (CURE) survey in one course (Biology 3492) revealed clear gains in students’ understanding of the research process, readiness for more demanding research, understanding how scientists approach real world problems, and the ability to analyze data. Gains in this course compared favorably to the gains noted in a parallel survey of independent undergraduate research experiences (SURE). In addition, course-based research experiences provide other student growth opportunities in areas that are complementary to those that result from independent mentored research, such as science writing and oral presentation.

Impacts of project or effort on students, fellow faculty, department or institution. If no time to have an impact, anticipated impacts: Overall, our experiences indicate that encouraging integration of faculty research with teaching can promote the adoption of innovative curriculum, help transform teaching practice throughout a department or other community, and motivate faculty members to promote the most effective pedagogy beyond their own institution.

Describe any unexpected challenges you encountered and your methods for dealing with them: One of the biggest challenges is encountered in assessing the effectiveness of this pedagogy. Discipline faculty are not trained in educational assessment and have limited time to develop these skills. Similar challenges are found in dissemination as encouraging faculty at other institutions to adopt this strategy can be difficult without administrative by-in. Seeking outside funding for dissemination can help meet this need as it removes budgetary concerns from the administration.

Describe your completed dissemination activities and your plans for continuing dissemination: In addition to wide adoption of this strategy in the Biology department, several faculty members are engaged in efforts to disseminate their curricula to other institutions. The most successful initiative has been the Genomics Education Partnership (https://gep.wustl.edu) (1), based on Biology 4342, which has been disseminated widely. A second model for dissemination is the Ciliate Genomics Consortium, based on Biology 3492 curriculum, which brings together members of an existing research community to form a professional learning community to implement effective teaching strategies.

Acknowledgements: References: 1. Lopatto, D., et al. 2008. Undergraduate research. Science 322:684-5. 2. Malone, C. D., et al. 2005. Mol Cell Biol 25:9151-64. 3. Malone, C. D., et al. 2008. Eukaryot Cell 7:1487-99. 4. Shaffer, Cet al.. 2010. CBE Life Sci Educ 9:55-69. 5. Leung et al 2010, Genetics 185:1519-1534. Acknowledgements: This abstract reports the efforts of many colleagues: Drs. J Jez, R. Kranz, E, Herzog, B. Carlson,and L. Strader, D. Mendez, and S. Horrell. Funding was provided by HHMI and NSF grants to Washington University or the listed professors.

Inquiry-Based Genomics Lab Module Collection

Return to search results | New search

Title of Abstract: Inquiry-Based Genomics Lab Module Collection

Name of Author: Lois Banta
Author Company or Institution: Williams College
Author Title: Associate Professor
PULSE Fellow: No
Applicable Courses: Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Bioinformatics, Cell Biology, Ecology and Environmental Biology, Evolutionary Biology, General Biology, Genetics, Integrative Biology, Microbiology, Neuroscience, Organismal Biology, Physiology & Anatomy, Plant Biology & Botany, Virology
Course Levels: Across the Curriculum, Faculty Development, Introductory Course(s), Upper Division Course(s)
Approaches: Material Development
Keywords: inquiry-based integrative genomics bioinformatics faculty-development

Name, Title, and Institution of Author(s): Erica J. Crespi, Vassar College Ross H. Nehm, Ohio State University Jodi A. Schwarz, Vassar College Susan Singer, Carleton College Cathryn A. Manduca, Carleton College Eliot C. Bush, Harvey Mudd College Elizabeth Collins, Vassar College Cara M. Constance, Hiram College Derek Dean, Williams College David Esteban, Vassar College Sean Fox, Carleton College John McDaris, Carleton College Carol Ann Paul, Wellesley College Ginny Quinan, Wellesley College Kathleen M. Raley-Susman, Vassar College Marc L. Smith, Vassar College Christopher S. Wallace, Whitman College Ginger S. Withers, Whitman College Lynn Caporale, Consultant

Goals and intended outcomes of the project or effort, in the context of the Vision and Change report and recommendations: The integration of genomic and bioinformatic approaches into undergraduate curricula represents one response to the national calls for biology teaching that is more quantitative and that promotes deeper understanding of biological systems through interdisciplinary analyses. Yet relatively few of the faculty members who teach undergraduate biology have expertise in the fields of genomics or bioinformatics. For these instructors, designing new teaching labs in a field that is developing so rapidly can feel particularly daunting. Our genomics education initiative was designed to address the challenges of helping faculty members integrate genome-scale science into the undergraduate classroom.

Describe the methods and strategies that you are using: The project utilized a grassroots model for faculty development, by supporting a national consortium of faculty members from eight liberal arts colleges in 1) learning about genomics and bioinformatics; 2) developing curriculum and laboratory teaching materials that stem from their own research and/or teaching interests, and that are informed by research in the learning sciences; and 3) devising tools to evaluate the efficacy of their genomics curricular innovations. Three workshops over three years supported these goals through a combination of learning from expertise within the participating group and from outside expertise on specific topics. The workshops brought together a total of 34 faculty participants from 19 institutions to develop a set of lab modules containing a substantial genomics component. Building on a proven faculty development model formulated by the geoscience education community, we complemented the multi-workshop program with a web-based interactive information portal. The initiative was structured such that the iterative interactions resulting from our three-workshop series would allow participants to share the experience of curriculum development, from the inception of an idea for a curricular module to the assessment of the implementation of that module, thereby generating a community of genomics educators among undergraduate institutions in the process. In addition, by bringing together educators from different institutions and scientific backgrounds, we aimed to stimulate discussion of interdisciplinary approaches to teaching genomics and facilitate the establishment of collaborations with other colleges and universities.

Describe the evaluation methods that you used (or intended to use) to determine whether the project or effort achieved the desired goals and outcomes: Products include peer-reviewed, guided inquiry-based, integrated instructional units (I3Us) adaptable to a range of teaching settings, with a focus on both model and non-model systems. Each curricular module is built on vetted design principles: (1) they have clear pedagogical objectives; (2) they are integrated with lessons taught in the lecture; (3) they are designed to integrate the learning of science content with learning about the process of science; and (4) they require student reflection and discussion (National Research Council, America’s Lab Report, Committee on High School Science Laboratories: Role and Vision; 2005). Each I3U was peer reviewed by fellow participants, as well as by a professional project consultant who has extensive experience with web-based description of teaching materials using this format to ensure that the I3U met the design criteria articulated above, and to evaluate whether the Activity Sheet provided both an easily accessible overview of the content and enough detailed information for other instructors to adapt and implement the material and its associated assessment strategies.

Impacts of project or effort on students, fellow faculty, department or institution. If no time to have an impact, anticipated impacts: Eleven I3Us were designed and implemented as multi-week modules within the context of an existing biology course (e.g., Microbiology, Comparative Anatomy, Introduction to Neurobiology); an additional three I3Us were incorporated into interdisciplinary Biology/Computer Science classes. Although these I3Us were designed for courses currently taught by the project participant within the specific institution’s curriculum, we propose that they can be inserted into other courses that encompass similar content and/or learning goals. We have received numerous communications from colleagues at other institutions who have adapted our I3Us for their courses.

Describe any unexpected challenges you encountered and your methods for dealing with them: Many participants lacked expertise needed to analyze sequence data or design wet labs and were overwhelmed by the array of possible tools, deciding which tools were useful in which scientific contexts, and the challenges of mastering their user interfaces. Some were concerned about teaching material with which they had little previous scientific experience. Most were isolated from colleagues who shared their interest or had the needed expertise to support their initial learning in this area. We provided hands-on training in three intensive days of short workshops, enabling participants to become familiar with bioinformatic tools for finding sequences, predicting the structure of proteins, visualizing and comparing genomes, and constructing phylogenetic trees. Participants who needed significantly more time to explore the tools and develop self-sufficiency maintained communication with at least one of the presenters over the course of the year, to obtain more training and to get ideas. For many, adapting bioinformatics tools into their modules was more easily accomplished by asking phylogenetic questions rather than adapting tools that could be used to explore genome-level questions of gene function or structure. The greatest challenge was that no robust assessment system, characterized by valid and reliable instruments evaluated by experts in education and psychometrics, existed to assess the efficacy of newly developed genomics and bioinformatics curricula. To help faculty build assessment tools, we provided: (1) A professional development session for faculty participants that reviewed the basics of educational assessment and the types of tools that could be employed in assessment efforts; (2) Individualized consultations to help participants build their assessments; and (3) Individualized consultations with faculty to assist in the interpretation of assessment data derived from point (2) above.

Describe your completed dissemination activities and your plans for continuing dissemination: All modules, together with extensive supporting material, are accessible on a dedicated website (https://serc.carleton.edu/genomics/activities.html) that also provides links to bioinformatics tools and on-line assessment and pedagogical resources, as well as all presentations from all three workshops, pre- and post-workshop content, and suggested readings provided by workshop leaders. The project website serves as a portal to Activity Sheets describing each I3U; these Activity Sheets include learning goals, teaching tips, and links to teaching materials, as well as downloadable assessment tools, that can be customized by any interested educator. Information about the collection of I3Us has been disseminated via publication.

Acknowledgements: This information has been published previously (Cell Biology Education-Life Science Education 11:203-208; 2012). The project was funded by the Teagle Foundation, with supplemental support from Williams College, Vassar College, and Schering-Plough.

A New Microbiology Curriculum Based on Vision & Change

Return to search results | New search

Title of Abstract: A New Microbiology Curriculum Based on Vision & Change

Name of Author: Ann Stevens
Author Company or Institution: Virginia Tech
Author Title: Professor
PULSE Fellow: No
Applicable Courses: Microbiology, Virology
Course Levels: Across the Curriculum, Faculty Development, Introductory Course(s), Upper Division Course(s)
Approaches: Mixed Approach
Keywords: General Microbiology, curricular guidelines, learning outcomes, backward design, professional society network

Name, Title, and Institution of Author(s): Sue Merkel, Cornell University Amy Chang, American Society for Microbiology

Goals and intended outcomes of the project or effort, in the context of the Vision and Change report and recommendations: Meaningful reform must come from many venues, including faculty and professional societies. In particular, professional societies play a critical and unique role as they have national stature, deep networks and resources, and respect from a wide range of faculty. In 2010, the AAAS and the NSF released the report Vision and Change in Undergraduate Biology Education: A Call to Action. In light of these recommendations, the American Society for Microbiology (ASM) revised its curriculum guidelines for introductory microbiology courses to emphasize deep understanding of core concepts, critical thinking and essential laboratory skills. In 2011, the ASM appointed a task force to develop a curriculum that would be relevant to both biology majors and allied health students. Early on, the task force adopted the five overarching concepts presented in Vision and Change. A sixth concept based on the potential applications of microbiology was added. The final list of core concepts is: evolution, cell structure and function, metabolic pathways, information flow and genetics, microbial systems and the impact of microorganisms.

Describe the methods and strategies that you are using: Task force members affirmed the process outlined by Vision and Change and adopted the framework of ‘backwards design’ (Wiggins and McTighe), in which curricula are designed around learning goals and assessments. Initially, they examined curricula from a variety of introductory microbiology courses and created a list of 24 ‘fundamental statements.’ Each fundamental statement is linked to one core concept and identifies an essential concept in microbiology. For example, a fundamental statement under the core concept of ‘Metabolic Pathways’ is ‘The growth of microorganisms can be controlled by physical, chemical, mechanical, or biological means.’ Each statement is purposefully broad, with the intention that educators use the statements to develop learning goals and assessments particular to their courses. The task force further embraced development of student skills, including understanding the process of science, communication and collaboration skills, quantitative competency, and the ability to interpret data. They added key laboratory skills which are critical for microbiology. Knowing it was vital to engage the educator community, the task force solicited feedback from ASM members on three occasions. The first was via an online survey that asked respondents to rate each fundamental statement and suggest ideas for additional ones. Based on feedback from more than 165 educators, the task force produced a second draft and subsequently solicited feedback from participants at the 2011 ASM Conference for Undergraduate Educators (ASMCUE). Over 140 educators participated, providing critical feedback. The third draft was published in the Society’s monthly magazine for members (nearly 40,000 readers) as well as on the ASM website (www.asm.org). Comments were collected from the community, which led to the final version. Feedback indicates a consensus on the fundamental knowledge that students should obtain in microbiology.

Describe the evaluation methods that you used (or intended to use) to determine whether the project or effort achieved the desired goals and outcomes: We are currently working to identify educators who have adopted the curriculum to document its implementation. In addition, because this represents a significant change in how many educators teach, we are engaging the community in discussions about how to use the guidelines and developing resources to encourage adoption. We will work with educators at a variety of different institutions to assess the impact of this new approach through surveys and questionnaires.

Impacts of project or effort on students, fellow faculty, department or institution. If no time to have an impact, anticipated impacts: Our hope is that as they adopt this curriculum, educators will also adopt the process of backward design. Our first step is to help educators learn how to write learning objectives, which guide students to understand the fundamental statements. To that end, ASM sponsored a plenary working session at the 2013 ASMCUE helping the participants to write learning outcomes that are mapped to the ASM curriculum guidelines. An ASM Task Committee is being formed to shepherd this work through a consensus-building process.

Describe any unexpected challenges you encountered and your methods for dealing with them: The new curriculum is asking most educators to change how they teach, from being content based to being focused on skills and learning. To ensure community acceptance of the ASM guidelines, the necessary scaffolding for faculty to implement guidelines and change practices is paramount. The plan is to develop a clearinghouse of practical, user-friendly resources during 2013-2014 (e.g. learning outcomes mapped to core concepts and accompanied by active learning activities) and a virtual community of practitioners involved in classroom improvements to help microbiology faculty adopt the guidelines. Finally, the ASM is engaging textbook writers and publishers to work together to advance the curriculum.

Describe your completed dissemination activities and your plans for continuing dissemination: This community-driven, consensus-building approach ensures that microbiology educators will incorporate the ASM recommended guidelines in future activities, presentations, classes, courses and programs. The national framework of concepts, statements, assessments and learning goals enable educators to more easily adapt the guidelines to their teaching needs. The ASM Task Committee will match teaching resources with learning goals, providing a range of activities that illustrate each fundamental statement in numerous ways for diverse student audiences. The resources and approaches enable students to build an enduring understanding of core microbiology concepts, as was called for in Vision and Change. Ultimately, the guidelines and supporting material have been developed by, with and for microbiologists. The ASM approach of engaging a leading disciplinary society in developing, implementing and advancing curriculum guidelines is a model for other societies.

Acknowledgements: NA

Molecular Biology Simulations for Case Based Learning

Return to search results | New search

Title of Abstract: Molecular Biology Simulations for Case Based Learning

Name of Author: Karen Klyczek
Author Company or Institution: University of Wisconsin-River Falls
Author Title: Professor
PULSE Fellow: No
Applicable Courses: Agricultural Sciences, Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Bioinformatics, Biotechnology, Cell Biology, Evolutionary Biology, General Biology, Genetics, Immunology, Integrative Biology, Microbiology, Virology
Course Levels: Introductory Course(s), Upper Division Course(s)
Approaches: Changes in Classroom Approach (flipped classroom, clickers, POGIL, etc.), Material Development
Keywords: computer simulations case studies bioinformatics molecular biology

Name, Title, and Institution of Author(s): Mark Bergland, University of Wisconsin-River Falls

Goals and intended outcomes of the project or effort, in the context of the Vision and Change report and recommendations: Our goal is to facilitate case studies and other active learning strategies via development of computer simulations of molecular biology lab techniques. This project addresses Vision and Change recommendation to relate biology concepts to real-world examples and make biology content relevant for students. The NSF-funded Case It project has produced case studies mainly in genetic and infectious diseases, in which students use simulation software to analyze authentic DNA and proteins sequences associated with the cases. By analyzing these cases, students address several core competencies, including applying the process of science, using quantitative reasoning, using modeling and simulation, and understanding the relationship between science and society. Based in part on the recommendations in the Vision and Change report, we have developed materials designed to prepare students for research projects involving bioinformatics analysis, to extend the existing case studies and for use with student-generated experiments. The software and materials are made available free of charge on the Case It web site (www.caseitproject.org) and have been used by secondary and undergraduate schools worldwide. Case It was awarded a 2011 Science Prize for Inquiry-based Instruction (Bergland et al. 2012, Science 337, 426 (2012).

Describe the methods and strategies that you are using: Case It is an open-ended simulation that reads any nucleotide or amino acid sequence file, and includes methods for analyzing DNA and proteins. These methods include restriction digestion and mapping, polymerase chain reaction (PCR), DNA electrophoresis, Southern blotting and dot blotting, microarray analysis, protein electrophoresis, Western blotting, and ELISA. Bioinformatics capabilities (sequence alignment, tree building) have been added via integration with MEGA software. The download includes the simulation as well as all of the sequences necessary to run the cases described on the web site. The case descriptions can be viewed from the Case It home page or downloaded as a pdf file. Students read case scenarios and explore background information for the case. They then use the simulation to open sequence files associated with the case and run the appropriate procedure to analyze the sequences, generating results in the form of images that can then be incorporated into presentations or reports. At the introductory-biology level, students can assume roles of persons in the cases, such as health-care professionals, lab technicians, researchers, or hypothetical family members. They then discuss results either in person or online. The open-ended nature of the simulation encourages inquiry by enabling users to analyze any DNA sequence, including entire viral or bacterial genomes, with any probe, primer, or restriction enzyme. For example, freshmen at UWRF participating in the HHMI Science Education Alliance PHAGES project use the Case It simulation to generate virtual digests of known phage genomes for comparison with actual gels of their newly discovered phages.

Describe the evaluation methods that you used (or intended to use) to determine whether the project or effort achieved the desired goals and outcomes: Assessment of the use of the Case It materials has demonstrated that it provides an active and collaborative learning environment that engages and motivates students. Pre- and post testing as well as individual and focus group interviews were used to assess its impact on student learning and perceptions in courses at several institutions in the United States and Puerto Rico. In all courses, students demonstrated significant learning gains as a result of using the simulation to analyze case studies involving bioinformatics analysis. In addition, students reported that the activities allowed them to explore science concepts from multiple perspectives in a real world context. The instructor-independent efficacy demonstrated in these studies indicates that the use of Case It materials has the potential to be scalable in a variety of institution types.

Impacts of project or effort on students, fellow faculty, department or institution. If no time to have an impact, anticipated impacts: Since 2012, the Case It software has been used by more than 10,000 students at 60 schools around the world. It was downloaded by many more faculty, from 105 different countries, so there is likely to be additional use that we have not been able to document. When we have assessed the impact on students in classes as described above, students using Case It showed improved post-test scores, and students' confidence in their knowledge also increased (Wolter et al., 2012, J Sci Educ Technol DOI 10.1007/s10956-012-9387-7). Faculty involved in software development, case writing, and assessment have been able to cite this work as scholarly activity for retention, promotion and tenure purposes.

Describe any unexpected challenges you encountered and your methods for dealing with them: Barriers to implementation of the Case It software include the need for faculty training in the use of the simulation. To address this issue, we have given many workshops at professional meetings and at the invitation of biology departments. We also have developed screencast tutorials that are posted on the web site. The web site also includes discussion forums where questions about the use of the simulation can be addressed. Finally, we are exploring the development of mobile applications of the software for use on tablets and other devices.

Describe your completed dissemination activities and your plans for continuing dissemination: We have given over 50 presentations, including workshops, oral presentations, and posters, at science education meetings in a variety of venues. In 2013 so far, we have presented at the NSF/AAAS TUES conference, American Society for Microbiology Conference for Undergraduate Educators, Science Case Network conference, and HHMI Quantitative Biology/BioQUEST workshop. We no longer have grant funding, but still plan to present at conferences as funding allows. Limited travel funds are available through the University of Wisconsin-River Falls, and from conference organizers when we are invited to present. We have published several papers describing strategies for implementing Case It and assessing its effectiveness, in Science, the Journal of Science Education Technology, American Biology Teacher, and others. In 2011 we joined the Science Case Network RCN-UBE project, and are collaborating with other case study and problem based learning projects to dissemination information and resources for faculty interesting in incorporating these active learning strategies (www.sciencecasenet.org). In 2012, the Case It web site, www.caseitproject.org, has been updated to include more interactive features and facilitate more effective dissemination of materials, and will continue to be updated.

Acknowledgements: The National Science Foundation has provided funding to support development, dissemination, and assessment of Case It materials (DUE grants 9455425, 9752268, 0229156, 0717577). Mary Lundeberg, formerly at Michigan State University and the University of Wisconsin-River Falls, has coordinated assessment of the project, with assistance from undergraduate and graduate students; in particular, Bjorn Wolter, former MSU graduate student. Chi-Cheng Lin assisted with critical aspects of the software that allowed incorporation of bioinformatics features. Rafael Tosado, Interamerican University of Puerto Rico-Metro Campus, Arlin Toro, Interamerican University of Puerto Rico-San German, and C. Dinitra White, North Carolina A & T State Unviversity, assisted in case development and assessment in their courses. Kim Mogen, Brad Mogen, University of Wisconsin-River Falls, and Eric Ribbens, Western Illinois University, have written case scenarios. Numerous faculty and student users have provided feedback on software features and ideas for new cases. The University of Wisconsin-River Falls College of Arts & Sciences and Provost’s office have provided support for faculty time and travel to conferences.

Enabling Student Success: A Learner-Centered Methodology

Return to search results | New search

Title of Abstract: Enabling Student Success: A Learner-Centered Methodology

Name of Author: Stephen Aley
Author Company or Institution: University of Texas at El Paso
Author Title: Professor
PULSE Fellow: No
Applicable Courses: and Pre-Calculus, Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Bioinformatics, Chemistry, Ecology and Environmental Biology, Evolutionary Biology, General Biology, Genetics, Microbiology, Organismal Biology, Physics, Virology
Course Levels: Across the Curriculum
Approaches: Assessment, Changes in Classroom Approach (flipped classroom, clickers, POGIL, etc.), Material Development
Keywords: Peer-Led Team Learning (PLTL) Curricular Research Interdisciplinary Quantitative Biology Assessment

Name, Title, and Institution of Author(s): James E. Becvar, University of Texas at El Paso Ann H. Darnell, University of Texas at El Paso

Goals and intended outcomes of the project or effort, in the context of the Vision and Change report and recommendations: The Biology undergraduate curriculum at the University of Texas at El Paso is undergoing vast changes that address both the University Mission (a pursuit for excellence in education while providing access to the people of El Paso) and a response to the state of Texas legislature’s call for a larger percentage of students graduating. UTEP Biology undergraduate students are 85% Hispanic, mirroring the population of El Paso and reflecting national trends. The intended outcome is to graduate more students and increase participation of underrepresented students in biomedical research.

Describe the methods and strategies that you are using: The change strategy focuses on a learner-centered methodology. Beginning in 2000, the curriculum format for general chemistry changed by replacing one faculty-delivered lecture (passive learning) per week with a required weekly two-hour workshop (active learning). The workshop includes one hour of problem solving in teams guided by a Peer Leader, followed by one hour of hands-on explorations. The explorations are simple experimental activities which promote student-initiated inquiry, guided by the Peer Leaders. Many activities are based on biology, demonstrating real-world examples of the conceptual material that students encounter in lecture. Building upon this active learning approach, a 2006-awarded HHMI grant implemented undergraduate research for at least one semester, and potentially two, for all biology majors. In 2007, an NSF-funded STEP grant expanded the chemistry peer-led workshop model to mathematics and physics. In 2008, NIH provided funding for a major curricular reform where the Core Competencies (Vision & Change, 2011) of quantitative reasoning, modeling and simulation were implemented, beginning with the first introductory biology course, concluding with new course development that consolidates courses designed to prepare students for various graduate studies including Bioinformatics and Biomedical Engineering. Eleven additional undergraduate biology courses (three of which were associated laboratory courses) were either revamped or developed (NIH MARC II) with the goal of increasing the emphasis on biological modeling, computational knowledge, statistical analysis, and data analysis. This curricular reformation targeted not only the increased understanding of core concepts including the ability to make connections among interdisciplinary problems, but an increase in perception of relevance of mathematics and computer modeling in the systems approaches required today.

Describe the evaluation methods that you used (or intended to use) to determine whether the project or effort achieved the desired goals and outcomes: 1) Successful course completion 2) Tracking students to graduation 3) Matriculation to graduate and professional school 4) Attitudinal surveys Results of these curricular modifications show that over a six year period between the fall of 2006 and the fall of 2012, the number of biological science students has nearly tripled at UTEP, with the percentage of underrepresented students, primarily Hispanic, rising 10% (to over 85%). Part of this growth is due to less attrition. Assessing degree output six years prior, the graduation rate has risen for those students who declare a major in a biology discipline (from 78% to 85%) over a six year timeframe. If we only maintain an 85% graduation rate, by 2018 we should see more than 1200 students, 85% which are Hispanic, entering the workforce or continuing at the graduate level prepared to critically address not only biology-related problems but complex interdisciplinary issues and challenges of the 21st century.

Impacts of project or effort on students, fellow faculty, department or institution. If no time to have an impact, anticipated impacts: The positive outcomes of the program not only include improved student success in course, but also the enhancement of professional development gained through self-guided and team-guided inquiry, presentation, and leadership opportunities. Leaders gain significant confidence in public speaking and motivational skills. Due to our unique program implementation, undergraduates have a great opportunity to significantly enhance the program. This is because they use their own creativity and are permitted to incorporate their suggestions. The expanded knowledge and experiences gained in peer-led workshops, undergraduate research, and interdisciplinary team-based learning activities are crucial to students planning careers in the research, medical, biotechnology, or academic fields. The modified biology curriculum creates stronger thinkers and self-learners. The institutional structure was impacted with the addition of student-only research laboratories where students learn by doing. *All biology students have an undergraduate research experience built into the courses *Increased statistics knowledge *Increased graduation *Increased matriculation into graduate and professional school *Team building *Leadership skills *Communication skills

Describe any unexpected challenges you encountered and your methods for dealing with them: Maintaining curricular changes

Describe your completed dissemination activities and your plans for continuing dissemination: Presentations at multiple meetings Writing one or more journal articles

Acknowledgements: NIH, NSF, HHMI

A New Model for a University 2 + 2 STEM Degree Program

Return to search results | New search

Title of Abstract: A New Model for a University 2 + 2 STEM Degree Program

Name of Author: Jennifer Drew
Author Company or Institution: University of Florida
PULSE Fellow: No
Applicable Courses: All Biological Sciences Courses, Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Bioinformatics, Cell Biology, Genetics, Microbiology, Virology
Course Levels: Across the Curriculum
Approaches: Mixed Approach
Keywords: Genomics Distance Education transfer online education Microbiology

Name, Title, and Institution of Author(s): Sebastian Galindo-Gonzalez, University of Florida Eric W. Triplett, Professor, University of Florida

Goals and intended outcomes of the project or effort, in the context of the Vision and Change report and recommendations: Our original efforts began with the development of a single undergraduate course, Bacterial Genome Sequencing & Analysis, in 2006, and without a doubt, the original vision of that course has prompted a cascade of changes and resulted in a cultural shift in our department to one of continual reassessment and improvement of our educational programs. Our vision has expanded far beyond this original course to the departmental level by revamping the entire curriculum, establishing a campus-wide minor program, and expanding the reach of these reforms with a distance degree program. Our overall objective is to demonstrate the success of a new model of increasing the number of STEM graduates and the diversity of graduates while upholding high degree standards and maintaining a cutting-edge curriculum.

Describe the methods and strategies that you are using: The University of Florida Microbiology & Cell Science Distance Education B.S. degree program officially began in Fall 2011 (https://microbiology.ifas.ufl.edu). This program is designed for Associate of Arts graduates to transfer into UF as distance students to complete the remaining two years towards their B.S. degree in MCS. The primary advantage and unique feature of this program is that the students will earn a 4-year degree from UF without relocating to Gainesville because the majority of the coursework is taught by distance. Often our best research universities, particularly public research 1 universities, are located in small college towns located over 100 miles from the major urban centers of their respective states. We believe that the physical and cultural distance between many public research 1 universities and the country's major urban centers is a leading impediment to the recruitment of outstanding low-income students of diverse backgrounds to the STEM disciplines. We hypothesize that by bringing the curriculum to qualified students through distance education, we can increase the number and diversity of microbiology graduates. We are forming partnerships with all 28 of Florida's community colleges to expand this program, but the first and most significant partnership is with Miami Dade College (MDC), the largest minority-serving institution in the US with over 170,000 students. Miami Dade College and UF signed an articulation agreement in 2011. We work with administration, faculty, and students to design elements of the degree program that specifically address the needs of the underrepresented population of MDC.

Describe the evaluation methods that you used (or intended to use) to determine whether the project or effort achieved the desired goals and outcomes: Outcomes will be determined by evaluating endpoints of total number of majors, total graduates, time to graduate as well as data from long-term tracking of graduates. Program quality, enrollment numbers, as well as retention and recruitment strategies are being thoroughly assessed by an experienced evaluator.

Impacts of project or effort on students, fellow faculty, department or institution. If no time to have an impact, anticipated impacts: To date, 47 students have enrolled in the online program, and four have graduated. The online program is increasing the participation of underrepresented minorities in STEM. Currently, 26% of enrolled students are Hispanic, which is an increase over the baseline proportion of Hispanic students at the University of Florida (18%). The long-term success of this program will be watched carefully by the institution. Many other departments are interested in adopting this model of degree delivery if this program proves a successful and sustainable endeavor.

Describe any unexpected challenges you encountered and your methods for dealing with them: We have recognized some barriers to success and have developed strategies to overcome those barriers such as improving administrative services (admissions, financial aid) and steadily encouraging faculty buy-in for online teaching formats. Enrollment numbers are increasing steadily, and beginning in March 2012, a marketing firm with expertise in online degree programs began to promote the program to help with recruitment. Numbers are now increasing at a faster pace, and interested students from Florida and across the nation inquire about the program daily.

Describe your completed dissemination activities and your plans for continuing dissemination: Since 2008, aspects of these curriculum efforts have been published in peer reviewed journal articles and presented in local and national conferences such as the American Society of Microbiology Conference for Undergraduate Educators and the NSF TUES Conference in 2013. Currently, a manuscript is in preparation describing the creating of a new model of a 2 + 2 program in STEM. Future plans include additional publications and meeting participation.

Acknowledgements: The authors would like to acknowledge three awards from the National Science Foundation from the Division of Undergraduate Education: Course, Curriculum and Laboratory Instruction (CCLI) Phase 1 (DUE 0737027), CCLI Phase 2 (DUE-0920151), and STEM Talent Expansion Project (STEP) grant (DUE-1161177).

PRIMER: Authentic Research on Environmental Microbiology

Return to search results | New search

Title of Abstract: PRIMER: Authentic Research on Environmental Microbiology

Name of Author: Jose Perez-Jimenez
Author Company or Institution: Universidad del Turabo
Author Title: Associate Professor/Director
PULSE Fellow: No
Applicable Courses: Agricultural Sciences, Bioinformatics, Biotechnology, Ecology and Environmental Biology, Microbiology, Research courses, Virology
Course Levels: Across the Curriculum
Approaches: Authentic Research Experience
Keywords: authentic research, microbiology, bioprospecting, biotechnology, mycology

Name, Title, and Institution of Author(s): Yomarie Bernier, Universidad del Turabo

Goals and intended outcomes of the project or effort, in the context of the Vision and Change report and recommendations: The overall goal has been to develop research skills and attitude among undergraduate students that energize them towards academic progress (retention) and success (graduation).

Describe the methods and strategies that you are using: Puerto Rico Institute for Microbial Ecology Research (PRIMER), as an authentic research experience model, has provide diverse levels for engagement for students. The skills development has three stages: apprentice (help others to conduct protocols and initial understanding), novice (perform protocols with minimal supervision and are capable of explaining the applied scientific method), and fellow (address new questions with the mentor and are capable of scientific writing with supporting literature). Students develop initial expertise in particular protocols that later teach to peers: a community of learning has evolved. Intellectual development is fostered throughout discussion sessions: regular laboratory meetings, oral presentations at local student forum, and poster presentation at scientific meetings (local and national). Participation at SACNAS National Conference is aimed every year.

Describe the evaluation methods that you used (or intended to use) to determine whether the project or effort achieved the desired goals and outcomes: We have noticed increase level of personal and academic confidence along the PRIMER process of research, collaboration, and dissemination. We lack a formal evaluation methodology.

Impacts of project or effort on students, fellow faculty, department or institution. If no time to have an impact, anticipated impacts: Students that took the opportunity with responsibility and dedication (~90%) has experienced academic success: retention, graduation, formal jobs, and pursue of graduate/professional education. In 1998, the undergraduate research experience motivated an interdisciplinary faculty team in biological sciences to strengthen institutional effort with formal dissemination forums and opportunities. Recently, students presentations have become part of the Researchers Forum (originally established for faculty).

Describe any unexpected challenges you encountered and your methods for dealing with them: PRIMER has operated as an extracurricular program that demands a lot of time on mentoring/training by the faculty and research/dissemination by the students. A learning community has evolved from learning protocols among more expert students, recruiting assistant mentors, and regular meeting aligned with dissemination commitments. We have formally proposed to organize research course in fixed schedule for more efficient time management and rigorous evaluations.

Describe your completed dissemination activities and your plans for continuing dissemination: Dissemination activities have been based on active participation with presentations at scientific forums (university, state, and nation). Recently, PRIMER was portrayed in the new magazine for the Chancellors office. Additionally, newsletter has been prepared and distributed on campus and NSF ATE-related events.

Acknowledgements: Research was supported in part by 'Richness and endemicity of sulfate-reducing bacteria in Neotropical environments' (NSF-RIG MCB-0615671), 'PRIMER Tropical Bioprospecting Venture at CETA' (NSF-ATE DUE-0903274), and 'PRIMER Bioprospecting for Bioenergy' (US Forest Service 11-DG-11330101-111) to Dr. Perez-Jiminez. We are thankful to Diana L. Laureano, Aracelis Molina, and Darlene Muñoz for administrative assistance. We are especially proud of the students than embraced the opportunity with responsibility and dedication to transform their lives.

Microbes, Metagenomes and Marine Mammals: Enabling the Next

Return to search results | New search

Title of Abstract: Microbes, Metagenomes and Marine Mammals: Enabling the Next

Name of Author: elizabeth dinsdale
Author Company or Institution: San Diego State University
Author Title: Dr
PULSE Fellow: No
Applicable Courses: Bioinformatics, Microbiology, Virology
Course Levels: Upper Division Course(s)
Approaches: Mixed Approach
Keywords: DNA sequencing, practical research experience

Name, Title, and Institution of Author(s): Robert A. Edwards, San Diego State University Meredith Houle Vaughn, San Diego State University

Goals and intended outcomes of the project or effort, in the context of the Vision and Change report and recommendations: The revolution in DNA sequencing technology continues unabated, and is impacting all aspects of the biological and medical sciences. The training and recruitment of the next generation of researchers who are able to use and exploit the new technology is severely lacking and potentially negatively impacting research and development efforts to advance genomics. Here we present a cross-disciplinary course which has three goals: 1) Inspiring student learning by allowing students to use the latest technology and generate new data; 2) Engaging students by integrating teaching and research; 3) Enabling students to integrate genomics in areas of biology and ecology. Many labs across world are installing next generation sequencing technology and we show that the undergraduate students produce quality sequence data and were excited to participate in cutting edge research.

Describe the methods and strategies that you are using: A practical course in DNA sequencing and annotating novel genomes from start to finish with a next-generation sequencer was offered to upper division undergraduates and graduate students as a lecture and laboratory course and was open to students across biology and computer sciences.

Describe the evaluation methods that you used (or intended to use) to determine whether the project or effort achieved the desired goals and outcomes: The first evaluation of the course was to assess the quality of the DNA sequencing data that the students produced. They sequenced 40 microbes, 60 metagenomes, and a marine mammal, the Californian sea lion, Zalophus californianus. The students met sequencing quality controls, had no detectable contamination in the targeted DNA sequences, provided publication quality data, and became part of an international collaboration to investigate carcinomas in carnivores. Evaluation of the course where conducted using pre and post formative and summative tests that assess student learning, in scientific conduct, genomic analysis, biology and computer science. Overall, the students perceived ability to conduct scientific research increased from 3.3 to 3.8 (t = -6.08; p = 0.001). The students show an increased confidence in conducting projects where 1) no one knows the outcome, 2) they have input into the process, 3) they need to work as a whole class and 4) they have responsibility for part of the process. The students increased in their ability to interpret primary literature, present data and keep a lab book. Skills required in becoming a successful scientist. In addition, students’ overall self-confidence in their ability to conduct genomic sequencing and analysis increased from 3.0 to 3.9 (t = -3.21; p = 0.01). All students would recommend the course to other students and had extremely positive comments about the course, and recognized that it would provide benefits for their future careers.

Impacts of project or effort on students, fellow faculty, department or institution. If no time to have an impact, anticipated impacts: Outputs to date include involving 130 students in research, 5 publications, 33 student presentation, and 5 papers in review all of which include student co-authors. We have been involved in four education forums, 1) CSUPERB genomic education workshop, 2) HHMI Bioinformatics workshop, 3) RABLE San Diego meeting to help develop laboratory training and 4) NSF TUES- Course Curriculum, Laboratory Improvement Conference. Developing and teaching this course have trained undergraduate students the newest technology, developed their scientific processing skills, helped many students obtain employment, and developed sequencing capabilities in Brazil and Chile.

Describe any unexpected challenges you encountered and your methods for dealing with them: Logistics to conduct the hands-on sequencing course was difficult because there is a high potential for contamination of the environmental DNA with the linker DNA, following the samples through the process and manipulation of large datasets. These logistical problems were overcome by teaching the course across multiple rooms and in a rotation fashion, so that every student gets to complete all the processes. Last a web site was set up to follow the samples and manipulate the data.

Describe your completed dissemination activities and your plans for continuing dissemination: The course is in its fourth year and other Faculty are providing samples and support to run the course. The Faculty receives publication quality data and the students get the practice at sequencing and annotation. Teaching undergraduates to use the latest technology to sequence genomic DNA ensures they are ready to meet the challenges of the genomic era and allows them to participate in annotating the tree of life. We are helping other universities set up similar courses and have visited Earlham College and the University of Puerto Rico. We are developing a faculty workshop to enable faculty to conduct and teach next generation sequencing and annotation.

Acknowledgements: We acknowledge Roche 454 Lifesciences for providing the backing to conduct the course. The course and EAD was supported by a NSF for Transforming Undergraduate Education in Science: 1044453 from the Division of Undergraduate Training grant. RAE is supported by NSF grants DBI: 0850356 from the Division of Biological Infrastructure and DEB: 1046413 from the Division of Environmental Biology.

Integrating Research into the Undergraduate Curriculum

Return to search results | New search

Title of Abstract: Integrating Research into the Undergraduate Curriculum

Name of Author: Sarah Ades
Author Company or Institution: Penn State University
Author Title: Associate Professor
PULSE Fellow: No
Applicable Courses: Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Cell Biology, General Biology, Genetics, Microbiology, Virology
Course Levels: Introductory Course(s), Upper Division Course(s)
Approaches: Changes in Classroom Approach (flipped classroom, clickers, POGIL, etc.), Material Development
Keywords: inquiry-based student-centered research laboratory course seminar

Goals and intended outcomes of the project or effort, in the context of the Vision and Change report and recommendations: There is a fundamental disconnect between the traditional approach to science education and the way science functions as a discipline. Science education has focused on lecture courses emphasizing facts, and laboratory courses in which students practice techniques. The scientific method of asking interesting questions, formulating hypotheses, designing experiments, and analyzing data, is difficult to convey in this format. Because science pervades nearly every aspect of modern society, it is imperative that we educate students in the theory and techniques of science and in the practice of primary research and its applications. To this end, we developed a two course progression to couple classroom learning with primary research and to integrate students into the research community starting in their freshman year. The first course is an introductory laboratory course that uses open-ended inquiry-based labs and student-centered active learning techniques that focus on the Core Concepts for Biological Literacy and the Scientific Method. The second course combines independent research in faculty laboratories with a student-driven seminar. The overall framework of these courses is expandable and readily adaptable to other areas of science. The overarching goal of these courses is to give the students a strong foundation in scientific inquiry to guide them in their education at the university and to provide them with the skills to become life-long educated consumers of science. Throughout the courses, units are chosen that relate life sciences to the students’ lives, address core concepts, and stimulate curiosity about the biological world.

Describe the methods and strategies that you are using: Introductory Lab Course: The primary goal of this course is to initiate students in the practice of science. It is taken by students in their second semester and is their first biological laboratory course. The emphasis is on understanding science as a discipline, while learning concepts of microbiology, lab safety, notebook skills, and experimental techniques. The course is divided into modules focusing on core concepts, such as evolution, information exchange, and microbial systems. Successive modules increase in complexity and build on concepts learned earlier in the course. For each module, peer groups of students discuss the topic and define a question of interest answerable through experimentation with guidance from the instructors. Peer groups develop hypotheses, design the experiments, and analyze their results. At the end of a module, students present their work in written or oral format. The presentations teach communication skills, allow students to learn from others, and enable the type of critical discussion of data and conclusions common in scientific communities. Communities of Practice: Sections of this course are organized around research questions that are shared among laboratories of several faculty members, such as antibiotic development or cellular differentiation. Students perform primary research in one of the laboratories and meet weekly in a seminar to investigate and discuss critical issues surrounding the research and the broader impacts of science on society. Students direct the seminar and choose topics for investigation as a group. An explicit goal of this format is to educate students on how to identify interesting and important scientific questions. Students learn how to gather information outside a classroom and how to synthesize and present material to their peers. Students participate in the course on an ongoing basis culminating with the senior thesis. In this manner, students develop a peer group in the section and laboratory.

Describe the evaluation methods that you used (or intended to use) to determine whether the project or effort achieved the desired goals and outcomes: A formal assessment plan to evaluate the outcomes of this two course sequence is currently being developed in conjunction with education experts at the Schreyer Center for Teaching and Learning at Penn State. Assessments will address retention of skills taught in the introductory lab course, understanding of the scientific method, and effects of involvement in these courses on student achievement and retention in the major. The laboratory course was first offered in 2013. Student ratings of teaching effectiveness for both semesters were very high and many students noted that the inquiry-based format enhanced their learning experience. The Communities of Practice course has been taught since 2009. Students who participated in the class have commented on how much the class helped in being prepared for graduate and medical schools.

Impacts of project or effort on students, fellow faculty, department or institution. If no time to have an impact, anticipated impacts: Although we have not yet assessed the courses with a formal research study, we have noted positive impacts of the courses. The inquiry-based introductory lab course is now recommended for all students entering the three majors hosted by our department. The Communities of Practice course is designed in a modular format that facilitates expansion. A course guide was developed so that sections of the course can be easily established by faculty groups who share research goals, whether in the same department or from different academic units.

Describe any unexpected challenges you encountered and your methods for dealing with them: Among the major challenges has been in finding the time to develop new courses and to gain a better understanding of teaching methods. Sabbatical time was instrumental. In addition, resources such as a course development workshop through the Schreyer Center for Teaching and Learning, seminars on teaching methods sponsored by the Center for Excellence in Science Education (CESE) of the Eberly College of Science at Penn State, and participation in international conferences on science education (ASMCUE) were critical for obtaining the background about teaching methods and theory to better design the courses. Fellowship support from the CESE also provided necessary resources to implement the course.

Describe your completed dissemination activities and your plans for continuing dissemination: The activities have been presented as a seminar for the CESE that was open to all faculty on campus. A course guide to the Communities of Practice course will be available for faculty interested in starting sections of the course. Plans are to write a description of the courses for the PULSE toolkit. Once more formal assessment has been done, the work will be presented at conferences and via publications.

Acknowledgements: These courses were developed and implemented in collaboration with Dr. Kenneth Keiler in the Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Department at Penn State. This work was supported in part by a Tombros fellowship from the Center for Excellence in Science Education of the Eberly College of Science at Penn State.

Integrating Statistics into the Life Sciences Curriculum

Return to search results | New search

Title of Abstract: Integrating Statistics into the Life Sciences Curriculum

Name of Author: Edward Bartlett
Author Company or Institution: Purdue University
Author Title: Associate Professor
PULSE Fellow: No
Applicable Courses: Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Cell Biology, Ecology and Environmental Biology, Evolutionary Biology, General Biology, Integrative Biology, Microbiology, Neuroscience, Organismal Biology, Physiology & Anatomy, Virology
Course Levels: Across the Curriculum, Faculty Development, Introductory Course(s), Upper Division Course(s)
Approaches: Assessment, Changes in Classroom Approach (flipped classroom, clickers, POGIL, etc.), Material Development
Keywords: undergraduate research, modules, faculty learning community, secondary school teachers.

Name, Title, and Institution of Author(s): James Forney, Purdue University-West Lafayette Ann Rundell, Purdue University-West Lafayette Kari Clase, Purdue University-West Lafayette Stephanie Gardner, Purdue University-West Lafayette Omolola Adedokun, Purdue University-West Lafayette Dennis Minchella, Purdue University-West Lafayette

Goals and intended outcomes of the project or effort, in the context of the Vision and Change report and recommendations: Our program has 4 components: 1) Summer undergraduate research program 2) Faculty learning community 3) Curriculum development 4) Secondary school teacher development and research. The objective of our HHMI-funded summer research program is to bring together faculty and undergraduate students from an array of academic institutions and disciplines to provide a facilitated ‘hands-on’ experience focusing on experiment design and statistical analysis within the context of life science-related research projects. The objectives of the faculty learning community are twofold. First, it brings together interested faculty, graduate students and postdocs to discuss advances, innovations, and best practices in teaching and curriculum. Second, it facilitates the design of course modules that will be used for curricular development. The objective of the Curriculum Development component is to introduce experimental design, statistical and quantitative analysis, and critical evaluation of data throughout the life science curriculum through “plug and play” modules that are incorporated into existing courses. The objective of the teacher-scientist component is to provide secondary school teachers with research experiences as well as to provide training and ideas for incorporating statistical and data analysis into their life science courses.

Describe the methods and strategies that you are using: Eighteen undergraduate students (Purdue University WL, Purdue Calumet, Purdue University North Central, Indiana University-Purdue University Fort Wayne, Franklin College, Morehouse College, and Saint Mary’s College) were hosted within 18 different research laboratories on the West Lafayette Purdue University campus for an 8 week long research experience in 2011-2013. Our second Faculty Learning Community (FLC) began in September of 2011 with twelve members drawn from the departments of Statistics, Biological Sciences, Biochemistry, Biomedical Engineering, Industrial Technology, Horticulture, and Forestry. The group contained two postdoctoral researchers, seven tenure track faculty and two staff members (one from the Purdue Center for Instructional Excellence). Roughly half of the meetings were focused on statistics/learning module development and the other half on student learning (e.g. active learning, student development, learning and memory). During 2012, six new modules have been completed, bringing the total number of available modules to twelve. An additional five are being developed by the most recent cohort of FLC members (2013). Modules now cover a broad swath of the life sciences at Purdue, such as new modules in Forestry and in Speech, Language and Hearing Science. The new modules have covered statistical concepts such as the chi-squared test and Bayesian statistics and techniques in data analysis using confocal images of plant samples collected by the students. used STEMEdHub (https://stemedhub.org/groups/hhmibio). These are publicly available, and users may download the modules and provide feedback on them. In April 2012 the four teacher-scientists from the Summer Institute in 2011, presented a workshop at the Annual Meeting for the National Science Teachers Association in Indianapolis, IN, to approximately 30 teachers. The materials are available at: (https://www.nsta.org/conferences/schedule.aspx?id=2012ind).

Describe the evaluation methods that you used (or intended to use) to determine whether the project or effort achieved the desired goals and outcomes: For the summer research program, assessments were a combination of assessments of competency, such as portions of Garfield's Statistical Reasoning Assessments, as well as interviews. Assessment of the faculty learning community was mainly via interviews with participants. Assessments for curriculum development have largely been based on the individual modules themselves, taking the form of a written report by the students, a poster presentation, or exam questions for example. Assessments of the teacher-scientist program were mainly using interviews.

Impacts of project or effort on students, fellow faculty, department or institution. If no time to have an impact, anticipated impacts: Summer research has resulted in at least 2 journal publications with students as co-authors. Students rated the summer research very highly, including the quantitative training sessions during each week as a group, as well as the students' interactions with their mentors. Over 12 faculty members, 4 postdocs, and 2 graduate students have participated as learning community members. They have rated the interactions within the community quite highly, and their participation has resulted in the bulk of the available modules. The 'plug and play' modules have been incorporated into many of the introductory and intermediate level courses in Biology, Biochemistry, and Biomedical Engineering. In addition, the modules are publicly available through a hosted site at Purdue. Over 6 teacher-scientists have been trained and have acted as role models within the community, holding larger outreach events.

Describe any unexpected challenges you encountered and your methods for dealing with them: For the summer research program, things we will improve for will be to continue to transform the quantitative training sessions towards effective problem based learning and to reinforce the link between the statistical analysis and the student research experience. For the faculty learning community, finding enough interested postdocs and willing advisors was difficult. We then permitted graduate students to join the faculty learning community, and they have been equally helpful in facilitating discussions of teaching and development of modules. For curriculum development, now that a large number of modules have been initially created and implemented in classes, but more or less piecemeal, it is important to make the modules more seamlessly integrated throughout the life sciences curricula. To do this, we have engaged new faculty of introductory courses and permitted them to attend a teaching workshop (SI Institute) as well as gathered syllabi to find common topics taught across courses. Following two summers of teacher-scientist training, the evaluation team recommended that the ?teachers receive focused training/instruction in very basic statistics?data representation, probability, etc from a plain spoken source. This instruction should be combined with pedagogical sessions wherein teachers brainstorm or work with each other to translate basic statistical concepts into classroom activities in life science contexts.? In order to address this recommendation the summer institute was revised to include two master math teachers that could provide: exemplar lessons from their classrooms, resources that would be appropriate to use with students, advice and insight during data analysis discussions and planning sessions for translating workshop topics into the classroom.

Describe your completed dissemination activities and your plans for continuing dissemination: Dissemination of summer student research has taken the forms of journal articles and posters at national meetings. Dissemination of the modules developed by faculty learning community members has taken the form of links to a website through Purdue's STEMEdHUB: STEMEdHub (https://stemedhub.org/groups/hhmibio/). Dissemination of findings and discussions of teachers is available at: https://hhmipurdue.wikispaces.com/ In addition, the first year research course has resulted in journal articles on the course design of such a course. Future dissemination will focus on publishing results from the various components of the program separately in journals, as well as a publication describing the overall program and its results and impact.

Acknowledgements: The authors gratefully acknowledge the Howard Hughes Medical Institute for providing funds for this project.