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.

Internships for Undergraduate Students with Disabilities

Return to search results | New search

Title of Abstract: Internships for Undergraduate Students with Disabilities

Name of Author: Richard Mankin
Author Company or Institution: USDA-ARS-Center for Med., Agric., Vet. Entomology
PULSE Fellow: No
Applicable Courses: Agricultural Sciences, Biophysics, Ecology and Environmental Biology, Organismal Biology
Course Levels: Upper Division Course(s)
Approaches: Assessment, Research
Keywords: interdisciplinarity assessment research agriculture mentorship

Goals and intended outcomes of the project or effort, in the context of the Vision and Change report and recommendations: Enhance research experiences of undergraduate biology students with disabilities by providing internships at an agricultural research laboratory. In the last three years, we have focused more on internships in the broader context of the students' educational institutions and our local resources. In interactions with the interns’ educational institutions, we have coordinated research projects of interns with their instructors and facilitated incorporation of the research into their coursework. Subsequent presentations by the interns to classmates were expected to be of benefit to the class and to the instructors. Also, we have encouraged interns to interact with other researchers and technical staff at the Center and nearby institutions, including the University of Florida and the Florida Division of Plant Industry.

Describe the methods and strategies that you are using: Design multidisciplinary research projects that can be completed during a summer. The projects include components of pest management, biology, electronic and acoustic technology, and computer programming. Coordinate efforts with instructors and advisors at the students' educational institutions. Provide opportunities for additional interaction of students with other researchers in multiple institutions in the local area (University of Florida, Florida Division of Plant Industry). Wherever possible, make opportunities for the students to explore areas of interest where they have particular skills or strengths. Include field trips to nearby farms and agribusinesses. Assess results.

Describe the evaluation methods that you used (or intended to use) to determine whether the project or effort achieved the desired goals and outcomes: Discussions with interns, staff, and researchers. Adaptations of survey tools discussed in Vision and Change Final Report

Impacts of project or effort on students, fellow faculty, department or institution. If no time to have an impact, anticipated impacts: Students were enthusiastic at the enhanced opportunities to interact with peers and other researchers in carrying out their projects, as well as to obtain feedback from farmers. Many of the technical and scientific staff responded with helpful suggestions and opened their labs to further interactions and learning experiences for the interns. Feedback was provided in seminars where the interns presented their work. Assessments enabled identification of problem areas.

Describe any unexpected challenges you encountered and your methods for dealing with them: The intense level of activity caused additional stress for some of the staff not used to working with young persons. Contact with these staff was reduced whenever possible, and the impact was lessened by the short, 8-week duration of the internships. In addition, each student has different interests and needs, and each research project has different dead-ends and barriers to overcome. Aspects of several projects failed. Fear, caution, or unfamiliarity often presents high barriers to interactions with persons who have apparent disabilities. Seminars where students presented information and brainstorming sessions helped overcome some of these challenges.

Describe your completed dissemination activities and your plans for continuing dissemination: Journal articles by the interns have been published, seminars have been presented, and researchers have been recruited as mentors for next year.

Acknowledgements: Funding from the Citrus Research and Development Foundation, and support and helpful comments from many local staff and researchers.

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

Class Generated Community Clicker Cases

Return to search results | New search

Title of Abstract: Class Generated Community Clicker Cases

Name of Author: tamar goulet
Author Company or Institution: University of MIssissippi
Author Title: Associate Professor
PULSE Fellow: No
Applicable Courses: Ecology and Environmental Biology, Organismal Biology, Physiology & Anatomy
Course Levels: Introductory Course(s)
Approaches: Assessment, Changes in Classroom Approach (flipped classroom, clickers, POGIL, etc.), Material Development
Keywords: Case studies, Clickers, Interviews, Involvement

Name, Title, and Institution of Author(s): Lainy B. Day, University of Mississippi Kristen A. Byler, University of Mississippi Kathleen Sullivan, University of Mississippi

Goals and intended outcomes of the project or effort, in the context of the Vision and Change report and recommendations: The goal of the study was to empirically test the efficacy of this novel pedagogic approach as an alternative technique to lecturing in a large, non-majors introductory biology course. In addition, multiple presentations and workshops at academic institutions, from 2-year community colleges to research-one institutions, exposed multiple faculty to this educational approach, potentially transforming their teaching.

Describe the methods and strategies that you are using: Class Generated Community Clicker Cases (CGCCC) is an innovative pedagogical approach that integrates and capitalizes on the strengths of both case studies and clickers. In CGCCC, students are given questionnaires that they fill out by interviewing members of their community, thereby creating the cases. Answers are collected in class via clickers and class discussion. Students’ data gathering advances the course content coverage, turning the disadvantage of large introductory non-major classes into an educational asset, and creates personal investment in the subject matter.

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 effectiveness of CGCCC versus lecturing were assessed using four indicators, two dealing with knowledge of biology, and two dealing with students’ perceptions of the study of biology. The indicators were: 1) Extent of students’ factual knowledge; 2) Extent of students’ ability to assimilate and apply the learned information; 3) Rates of student attendance in the class; and 4) Extent of self-reported student satisfaction with the course. This study also addressed faculty members’ apprehension of non-lecture techniques by providing data on alternative methods for teaching large introductory science classrooms. Data collection thus far occurred during the Spring 2010, Fall 2010, Fall 2011 and Spring 2012 semesters. In each semester, to control for instructor bias, the same instructor taught two class sections, one in the CGCCC approach and one via lecture. In the Fall 2010 and Fall 2011 semesters, two faculty, each teaching a CGCCC and lecture class, collected data, enabling between instructor comparison. A total of 12 class sections thus far participated in the study, 6 sections taught via CGCCC (total n = 603) and 6 sections taught in a lecture format (total n = 618). To control for a potential clicker effect, both CGCCC and lecture sections used clickers to collect student responses during the class period and during exams.

Impacts of project or effort on students, fellow faculty, department or institution. If no time to have an impact, anticipated impacts: Students in the CGCCC class with more positive perceptions of the interview component of the class tended to earn higher test grades than did students who reported lower levels of satisfaction with the interview component. The CGCCC approach did affect students’ attitudes. Students described a gain from the interviews, for example the interviews connected science with their lives, they thought interviewing people was interesting, and they learned to identify central issues via the interviews. These gains may affect attitudes towards, and long-term retention of, biological content. Following my colleague's involvement as a senior personnel in my grant, my colleague applied for and received her own TUES grant in which she is utilizing case studies in an upper undergraduate level neurobiology course for biology majors. The Department Chair was supportive of testing the CGCCC approach and provided the room and section time slots that enabled comparisons of the sections.

Describe any unexpected challenges you encountered and your methods for dealing with them: The teaching approach being tested relies on students conducting interviews and reading the textbook. A challenge emerged of having the students take the interviews seriously. We therefore assigned points for the interviews. To address reading the book, we created an assignment where students had to write the page numbers that pertained to the interview questions. Students received points for this assignment. Students’ prior knowledge and students’ current academic performance affect their learning success in a non-majors introductory biology course. In tandem with applying novel pedagogical approaches, students’ perception of their ability to learn and students’ commitment to learning need to be assessed and perhaps modified.

Describe your completed dissemination activities and your plans for continuing dissemination: This project will affect both students and faculty. Due to the workshops and other dissemination venues, the project’s influence will transcend the University of Mississippi.

Acknowledgements: This study was supported by The National Science Foundation (DUE-0942290)

Animal Diversity Web -- A Resource for Learning and Teaching

Return to search results | New search

Title of Abstract: Animal Diversity Web -- A Resource for Learning and Teaching

Name of Author: Phil Myers
Author Company or Institution: University of Michigan
Author Title: Professor
PULSE Fellow: No
Applicable Courses: Ecology and Environmental Biology, Evolutionary Biology, General Biology, Integrative Biology, Marine Biology, Organismal Biology, Physiology & Anatomy
Course Levels: Across the Curriculum, Introductory Course(s), Upper Division Course(s)
Approaches: Assessment, Changes in Classroom Approach (flipped classroom, clickers, POGIL, etc.), Material Development
Keywords: inquiry, comparative biology, organismal biology, natural history, active learning

Name, Title, and Institution of Author(s): Tanya Dewey, University of Michigan George Hammond, University of MIchigan Roger Espinosa, University of Michigan Tricia Jones, University of Michigan

Goals and intended outcomes of the project or effort, in the context of the Vision and Change report and recommendations: Our understanding of the patterns and processes that underlie fields including ecology, evolutionary biology, conservation biology and related disciplines is based largely on knowledge accumulated by studying species of organisms. These data are complex, reported in different ways by different investigators, and usually not stored in central repositories using consistent metadata. Thus, while data from these fields potentially can be used to address Vision and Change Core Concepts 1 (Evolution), 2 (Structure and Function, and 5 (Systems), and Core Competencies 1 (Ability to Apply the Process of Science), 2 (Ability to use Quantitative Reasoning), 4 (Ability to Tap into the Interdisciplinary Nature of Science), 5 (Ability to Communicate and Collaborate with Other Disciplines), and possibly 3 (Ability to Use Modeling and Simulation), biologists in these disciplines have had little success at incorporating inquiry activities or other forms of active learning based on them in their classrooms. This in sharp contrast to the wealth of resources for inquiry learning in molecular, cellular, and developmental biology (e.g. BioQuest, BioSciEdNet, GenBank, etc.). To answer this need, beginning in 1995, we created an on-line database of species biology that students could search to discover for themselves these patterns and processes and test hypotheses based on them. The Animal Diversity Web (ADW, https://animaldiversity.org), is built with student contributions of information about animal species that are reviewed for accuracy and incorporated into a structured database that allows flexible re-use. The ADW is one of the most widely used natural history databases online globally, with nearly 4000 detailed taxon descriptions and a wide user base, delivering over 1 million page views to 300,000+ site visitors monthly. Over 70% of visitors report using the ADW for educational purposes. The ADW is currently the only natural history online that allows flexible querying of data.

Describe the methods and strategies that you are using: Writing ADW species accounts has become an important part of many organismal biology courses. Accounts are submitted through a structured online template that supports literature review and synthesis and provides experience writing in the discipline. Published accounts on ADW serve as examples of student work for job and graduate applications and are used by faculty to document teaching impact. The ADW product that has the greatest potential to provide transformative undergraduate educational experiences is its rich and structured database . We built and refined a complex querying tool that enables students to discover patterns and test hypotheses on their own, and we are working with instructors to create and incorporate inquiry-based activities based on it in their classes (https://animaldiversity.org/q). This flexible and powerful tool has now been tested and successfully incorporated in a wide range of biology courses. A library of activities, organized by the nature of the course for which it was written, is shared on the site and activities are added regularly as they are developed and tested by faculty.

Describe the evaluation methods that you used (or intended to use) to determine whether the project or effort achieved the desired goals and outcomes: Evaluation focuses on impact on students, impact on faculty, and success at incorporating new sources of data. We combine interviews, frequent interactions, and formal questionnaires to address impact on faculty. The focus is on their assessment of the impact of our materials on their students, the degree to which activities are aligned with their curricula, and the effectiveness of our training sessions with the faculty themselves. Students respond to questions before and after the activities that test their inquiry and reasoning skills, the ease of use of our database and querying tools, and their attitude about science. Measures of success regarding the incorporation of new data are mainly quantitative: how many sources do we integrate, how extensively are they used by participants, etc. All assessment is designed and lead by an external evaluator.

Impacts of project or effort on students, fellow faculty, department or institution. If no time to have an impact, anticipated impacts: We are currently incorporating activities based on the ADW query engine into classrooms of approximately 35 faculty at 30 institutions nationwide, including evaluation of impacts on student and faculty perceptions. Our goal is to provide engaging, inquiry-based educational experiences that align with curricula in organismal biology courses. Participating institutions include large, research-intensive universities, smaller 4-year colleges that emphasize teaching, and 2-year colleges. Even wider dissemination of this tool and research outcomes is anticipated in summer 2013 as a result of presentations at key meetings of professional societies. ADW taxon account writing has been used as a formal part of teaching ‘organismal’ courses at over 65 institutions, including some that have participated for over 10 years. These accounts represent the work of over 1500 student authors since 2010.

Describe any unexpected challenges you encountered and your methods for dealing with them: The challenges of bringing together diverse data streams are daunting, and to address thm, we were recently awarded a NSF RCN-UBE Incubator grant (1247821) to bring undergraduate biology education projects together with large biological database projects. Our goal is to develop a set of recommendations to make these kinds of authentic data available in formats accessible to students. A meeting of participating projects will take place this summer. If the goal of increasing the accessibility of data can be accomplished, the possibilities of rich research experiences for students that cut across a variety of disciplines becomes very real. Despite our impact at other institutions and in the broader education community, we have encountered obstacles to instituting change in our own department at the University of Michigan. Few faculty colleagues have expressed interest in modifying their own teaching approach. However, we have received strong encouragement from our department chair and from the college to further develop the ADW project, as it is recognized as an important education and outreach resource.

Describe your completed dissemination activities and your plans for continuing dissemination: The Animal Diversity Web maintains strong and active collaborative relationships with many other biology education resource projects, such as Encyclopedia of Life, VertNet, and AmphibiaWeb. We regularly share ideas about new developments and resources with a broad community of other organizations involved in promoting inquiry-driven learning in undergraduate courses and data useful in inquiry. The ADW actively participates in efforts to support innovative, inquiry-driven approaches to undergraduate biology education. We recently participated in the inaugural Life Discovery-Doing Science conference organized by the ESA (https://www.esa.org/ldc/). ADW has helped to organize and present at workshops to promote inquiry-driven learning approaches at 2012 and 2013 Evolution Meetings. Finally, the ADW has taken the lead in organizing a workshop that will bring together national leaders in promoting innovation in biology education and databases that organize and share data that is useful in education. The goal of this workshop, recently funded by NSF as an RCN-UBE Incubator project, is to develop a strategic plan for enhancing the accessibility and use of real biological data in undergraduate education.

Acknowledgements: We gratefully acknowledge support from the National Science Foundation (DRL 0089283, DRL 0628151, DUE 0633095, DRL 0918590, DUE 1122742, DBI 1247821). We also thank Prof. Nancy Songer and her group in the Univ. Michigan School of Education for 15 years of productive collaboration and patient instruction in the field of education.

Using Evo-Devo to Implement Change in Upper-Level Courses.

Return to search results | New search

Title of Abstract: Using Evo-Devo to Implement Change in Upper-Level Courses.

Name of Author: Anna Hiatt
Author Company or Institution: University of Kansas
Author Title: Postdoctoral Teaching Fellow
PULSE Fellow: No
Applicable Courses: Evolutionary Biology, Genetics, Integrative Biology, Organismal Biology
Course Levels: Upper Division Course(s)
Approaches: Assessment, Material Development
Keywords: evo-devo, evolutionary biology, developmental biology, inquiry-based teaching and learning, concept inventories

Name, Title, and Institution of Author(s): Donald P. French, Oklahoma State University

Goals and intended outcomes of the project or effort, in the context of the Vision and Change report and recommendations: Using a discipline-based approach, we developed an inquiry-based activity targeting evo-devo concepts for two upper-level undergraduate biology courses in Evolution and Embryology. The activities include tapping into the interdisciplinary nature of science, active use of quantitative reasoning and computational biology to solve problems, and implementing classroom and laboratory assessments. Our goal is to document change in student understanding of evo-devo concepts throughout the course of the semester in the two courses. Additional goals include recruitment of faculty to adopt similar practices and activities in their courses.

Describe the methods and strategies that you are using: The evo-devo teaching unit draws on examples from authentic research using Stickleback fishes as a case to evaluate both population and molecular level evolutionary changes within this system. Several major themes emerge in the unit that encourage the integration of evolution and development: Population genetics studies of traits to differentiate between drift and selection, developmental and genetic basis of morphological changes, conceptual understanding and modeling of gene switches and regulatory DNA, and understanding the relationship between molecular-level proximate mechanisms of evolution and their ultimate effect on populations. To assess the outcomes of these changes we evaluated students using student artifacts and a variety of diagnostic tools. The EvoDevoCI is a recently validated instrument developed by the authors that specifically measures student understanding of six core evo-devo concepts. Using the EvoDevo CI as a tool to measure learning gains over the course of the semester, we issued pre- and post-tests at the beginning and end of the semester in Embryology and before and after the evo-devo unit was taught in the Evolution course. We also used lecture exams and lab activities to evaluate student understanding of evo-devo and related concepts in both courses: these include the use of short-answer and essay questions as well as lab reports and oral presentations. These assessments were administered to ascertain whether incorporating approaches outlined in Vision and Change improved undergraduate biology majors’ understanding of and ability to apply evo-devo and related foundational concepts.

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 EvoDevoCI evaluates six core evo-devo concepts that will allow us to measure any change in student understanding of this interdisciplinary area. The activity requires students to apply evolutionary concepts to developmental contexts and discern between a variety of evolutionary mechanisms. In the process, we hope this also alleviates persistent evolutionary misconceptions. The EvoDevoCI was administered before any evo-devo instruction was provided at the beginning of the semester and was administered two weeks after the Stickleback teaching unit concluded. By evaluating learning gains in each of the core concepts we are able to document any change in student understanding. Additional qualitative data was obtained from open-response questions and activities collected during the instructional unit. This may provide additional data on how student conceptual understanding may have shifted during the teaching unit.

Impacts of project or effort on students, fellow faculty, department or institution. If no time to have an impact, anticipated impacts: This project directly impacts the two instructors who have had no previous training in scientific teaching. Their participation was voluntary and both intend to continue using this activity in future semesters. Both have also expressed interest in learning more about assessing their students and developing effective teaching units. One professor in particular has been highly motivated in using more effective assessments to capture student understanding of evolutionary concepts. This also provides a ‘domino-effect’ in that many other faculty have become more interested in how to assess their students properly. At OSU, the introductory biology course has been employing inquiry-based teaching and learning activities for over a decade and many faculty who are assigned to teach are able to invest in learning about these practices and taking them to their upper-level courses. However, little overall departmental changes are visible: The undergraduate assessment committee has adopted more appropriate assessment methods, but little has been done to promote or document changes across the degree program.

Describe any unexpected challenges you encountered and your methods for dealing with them: Many faculty are time-constrained in their ability to add or re-arrange a syllabus to accommodate a new instructional unit. To help create an incentive and alleviate this constraint, Dr. Hiatt delivered all of the instructional units to both courses as a guest-lecturer. The participating faculty attended these lectures and met periodically throughout the semester to discuss the project with the intent the instructor of record would implement and teach the lesson in subsequent semesters.

Describe your completed dissemination activities and your plans for continuing dissemination: The results of this project will be published as an article documenting learning gains in upper-level biology courses. We also plan to present these findings at the National Association of Biology Teachers conference in November. The primary author, Dr. Hiatt, recently moved to a post-doctoral position at the University of Kansas and plans to continue to collect data using the EvoDevoCI in a variety of biology courses. At OSU, the Undergraduate Assessment Committee has made plans to expand its assessment strategies to include qualitative artifacts and student interviews.

Acknowledgements: Instructors Michi Tobler, Arpad Nyari, and Andy Dzialowski. And transcribers and research assistants Kat Moriarty and Heather Stigge.

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.

Vision and Change in a Reformed Biology Curriculum

Return to search results | New search

Title of Abstract: Vision and Change in a Reformed Biology Curriculum

Name of Author: Richard Cyr
Author Company or Institution: Penn State
PULSE Fellow: No
Applicable Courses: Cell Biology, Ecology and Environmental Biology, General Biology, Organismal Biology, Physiology & Anatomy
Course Levels: Across the Curriculum, Faculty Development, Introductory Course(s), Upper Division Course(s)
Approaches: Adding to the literature on how people learn, Assessment, Changes in Classroom Approach (flipped classroom, clickers, POGIL, etc.), Material Development, Mixed Approach
Keywords: Large Courses Pedagogy Training Learning Communities Post-doctoral Teaching Fellows Faculty Workshops

Name, Title, and Institution of Author(s): Denise Woodward, Penn State

Goals and intended outcomes of the project or effort, in the context of the Vision and Change report and recommendations: The Penn State Department of Biology considers Vision and Change (V&C) a roadmap for the future in education in the Life Sciences and our long-term goal is to fully integrate all Core Concepts and Competencies into Biology’s curriculum. Initially our efforts are and will continue to be focused on the freshman/sophomore curriculum, but there will be spillover into the junior/senior (and graduate) levels. The intended outcome is a reformed Biology curriculum that better retains students in their first two years, focusing on matriculating metacognitive undergraduates who have a solid grasp of how science is done and how this knowledge can help solve problems facing society.

Describe the methods and strategies that you are using: All V&C Core Concepts and Competencies have been adopted as Biology’s goals. Scaling learner-centered approaches in large classrooms is a challenge and our strategy involves experimenting with techniques in one course, then transferring effective techniques to others. Learning communities are essential to scaling and a ‘Peer Learning Corp’ has been created along with a pedagogy course that focuses on what the current research reveals about how students learn, along with applications of this knowledge to specific courses learning activities. A need for formal pedagogy training of graduate students was recognized and a graduate student-level pedagogy program was developed. In the first semester students participate in a discussion-based classroom, while in the second semester they help in a teaching lab and receive feedback that helps them improve their classroom effectiveness. A ‘V&C Post-Doctoral Teaching Fellows Program’ has been developed, which provides pedagogical training as well as a mentored teaching experience for post-docs. The pedagogy training consists of either the graduate-level pedagogy course and/or participation in workshops. Once pedagogy training is completed, they teach a small class, where a mentor reviews their course materials, attends classes and provides feedback. To better educate our faculty about the value of learner-centered instruction, a one-week workshop was developed. Freshman/sophomore labs have been reformed to a more inquiry-based format. With College of Education assistance, our labs have become more relevant to the problems that face society. Several faculty members now introduce their own research questions into the freshman/sophomore labs. In addition, our large courses are now used as test beds to gain insights into student learning, resulting in co-published papers with Education faculty.

Describe the evaluation methods that you used (or intended to use) to determine whether the project or effort achieved the desired goals and outcomes: Using V&C as a roadmap, a matrix was created of how our freshman and sophomore courses aligned. This process identified gaps, and steps have been taken to fill these curricular voids. We are currently developing a systematic approach to assess learning outcomes that are aligned with V&C. In the coming year, we plan to map each question from all freshman and sophomore course exams to the V&C Content and Competencies. Once done, student performance data on each question will be collected. This will allow us to track student exam performance in a categorical matrix. In future years, we also plan to assign some type of Bloom taxonomy scale to each question so that insight is gained into the depth of learning that is taking place. Student attitude surveys are being administered to reformed introductory labs, both at the beginning and at the conclusion of each course.

Impacts of project or effort on students, fellow faculty, department or institution. If no time to have an impact, anticipated impacts: Using Learning Assistants, large lecture halls have been transformed into communities of 25 neighborhoods, with Learning Assistants helping students understand complicated worksheets and problems posed by their instructors. There has been an increase in the number of freshman/sophomore courses that are taking a deliberate, learner-centered approach. All four of Biology’s core courses plan to expand their learner-centered activities. The number of students in the Peer Learning Corp has similarly grown. Course material developed in Biology for pedagogy training is now in use around the College. In the coming years, we plan to engage more faculty members in learner-centered instruction and to make further improvements in Biology’s freshman/sophomore lab courses. Our Peer Learning Corp is essential for scaling, and next year we anticipate having 210 participants. Students taking our pedagogy courses say it helps them not only work more effectively with their own students, but it also reveals to them how their own learning works. Although envisioned as a program to help students enrolled in a biology course, evidence reveals that this peer-learning engagement helps the leaders too. We have found that students who participate in the Peer Learning Corp are retained in science majors at a higher frequency, compared to the general student population. The faculty workshop (sponsored by the College’s Center for Excellence in Science Education; CESE) was held for the first time this year. Five sessions were presented by 6 faculty members (from PSU and elsewhere), with 43 Penn State registrants.

Describe any unexpected challenges you encountered and your methods for dealing with them: Not all students welcome learner-centered instruction, which is exhibited in various ways. In the coming year, students’ resistance will be addressed by being more transparent as to why they are asked to engage in various activities. In addition, we will strive to take a more proactive position in identifying these resistant students early and, with the help of our experienced Learning Assistants, these students will be targeted for interventions.

Describe your completed dissemination activities and your plans for continuing dissemination: As mentioned, Biology’s pedagogy course material has been shared with faculty in the Eberly College of Science. In addition, faculty members at other institutions have been given access to the materials. The CESE webpages contain materials used in the workshop described earlier herein. Information on the Peer Learning Corp is being collected and will be posted on the Biology website. Penn State is a system that comprises 22 locations. (A total of about 50,000 student credit hours of biology instruction are delivered system-wide.) The Biology faculty members throughout the system meet annually and the activities described herein will be shared with them at our next meeting and via a discussion group that is available to Biology faculty throughout the system.

Acknowledgements: Howard Hughes Medical Institute Eberly College of Science

Learning Gains from Guided-Inquiry Labs with Bean Beetles

Return to search results | New search

Title of Abstract: Learning Gains from Guided-Inquiry Labs with Bean Beetles

Name of Author: Lawrence Blumer
Author Company or Institution: Morehouse College
Author Title: Professor
PULSE Fellow: No
Applicable Courses: Ecology and Environmental Biology, Evolutionary Biology, Genetics, Neuroscience, Organismal Biology, Physiology & Anatomy
Course Levels: Faculty Development, Introductory Course(s), Upper Division Course(s)
Approaches: Assessment, Changes in Classroom Approach (flipped classroom, clickers, POGIL, etc.), Material Development
Keywords: guided inquiry, assessment, bean beetles, Callosobruchus, faculty development

Name, Title, and Institution of Author(s): Christopher W. Beck, Emory University

Goals and intended outcomes of the project or effort, in the context of the Vision and Change report and recommendations: The aims of this project were increasing the use of guided-inquiry in undergraduate laboratory courses and to foster the development of new guided inquiry experiments with the bean beetle, Callosobruchus maculatus, model system in physiology, neurobiology, genetics, molecular biology, and developmental biology. Guided-inquiry is a student-centered inquiry method that aligns with the Vision and Change report recommendation that students learn science by doing science.

Describe the methods and strategies that you are using: We conducted four annual faculty development workshops that were attended by a total of 81 faculty from 40 different institutions. Participants were selected to represent a diversity of institution types including 12 minority-serving institutions (24 participants) and eight community colleges (16 participants). Participants, in teams of two from each institution, learned how to work with bean beetles, how guided-inquiry learning may be conducted, and developed a new laboratory activity with bean beetles that they class tested at their own institution.

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 conducted an Instructional Practices assessment on our workshop faculty participants both prior to our workshop and after implementing their new guided-inquiry laboratory activity. Students in the classes in which a new laboratory activity was implemented also were surveyed on their perceptions of their faculty Instructional Practices. These assessments were conducted to determine whether our workshops changed faculty instructional practices. Furthermore, students were assessed in a pre-test, post-test format on their confidence to conduct scientific research, their knowledge of the nature of science, and their problem solving skills. These student assessments were conducted to determine the effectiveness of guided-inquiry learning.

Impacts of project or effort on students, fellow faculty, department or institution. If no time to have an impact, anticipated impacts: In the first three years of the project, approximately 481 students at 11 institutions were directly affected. They conducted guided-inquiry bean beetle experiments in 37 different courses. The faculty development workshops we conducted were successful in changing teaching practices and those changes were reflected in student perceptions of how they were taught. Students participating in guided-inquiry activities experienced significant gains in confidence to conduct scientific research and these gains were greatest among students whose pre-test confidence was in the lowest quartile. Similarly, the greatest gains in knowledge of the nature of science and problem solving skills were among those students in the lowest pre-test quartiles. These findings indicate that guided inquiry laboratories provide the greatest benefits for students whose needs are the greatest. Our findings provide strong support for the transformation of undergraduate laboratory instructional methods recommended in the Vision and Change report.

Describe any unexpected challenges you encountered and your methods for dealing with them: Not all the faculty who attended our workshops successfully completed their development of a new laboratory activity. This challenge was not entirely unexpected and we withheld two-thirds of their stipend as an incentive for them to complete their work. This incentive was sufficient for the majority of our workshop participants.

Describe your completed dissemination activities and your plans for continuing dissemination: The new guided-inquiry laboratory activities that our workshop participants developed are being posted on the bean beetle website, www.beanbeetles.org. The open access content for these laboratory activities consists of a student handout, instructor notes, sample data, and image and data slides. This website will be maintained for a minimum of 10 years after the end of this project. We continue to collect data from faculty teams that are in the process of completing their work. The results of the Instructional Practices surveys of faculty and students, and the student pre-test, post-test student assessments of confidence to conduct scientific research, knowledge of the nature of science, and problem solving skills will be prepared as manuscripts for publication in peer reviewed journals.

Acknowledgements: We thank Dr. Tom McKlin of the Findings Group for his external evaluation of our project. We also thank the faculty and students of the participating colleges and universities. This project was supported by the National Science Foundation DUE-0815135 and DUE-0814373.

Creating a Coherent Gateway for STEM Teaching and Learning

Return to search results | New search

Title of Abstract: Creating a Coherent Gateway for STEM Teaching and Learning

Name of Author: Diane Ebert-May
Author Company or Institution: Michigan State University
Author Title: Professor
PULSE Fellow: No
Applicable Courses: 1468, 1487, Cell Biology, Ecology and Environmental Biology, Evolutionary Biology, General Biology, Genetics, Math, Organismal Biology, Plant Biology & Botany
Course Levels: Across the Curriculum, Introductory Course(s)
Approaches: Mixed Approach, Research driven
Keywords: assessment, learning communities, introductory science and math courses, change models, retention

Name, Title, and Institution of Author(s): Tammy Long, Michigan State University Robert Pennock, Michigan State University Mark Voit, Michigan State University

Goals and intended outcomes of the project or effort, in the context of the Vision and Change report and recommendations: At Michigan State University, we are focusing on the reform of gateway courses in not only in biology but also in chemistry, physics and mathematics involving over 4000 students in a typical semester. Using a model of change that depends upon a shared vision, teams of faculty from the disciplinary departments will come together to identify the disciplinary and cross-disciplinary core ideas and scientific and mathematical practices that, together, we will blend to develop performance expectations. We are developing assessments that emphasize both these core ideas and scientific or mathematical practices, which in turn will require that faculty change their classroom practices. In this way, we focus on the important ideas and practices of the STEM disciplines, and emphasize the interdisciplinary nature of modern science and mathematics. Learning communities composed of faculty, postdoctoral fellows and graduate students will be supported as they contribute to the shared vision of the reformed gateway courses. This project is complementary to an existing project funded by AAU and was proposed to the recent NSF-WIDER competition, intended to lead to reform of gateway courses and changing the culture of research universities to emphasize the importance of teaching and learning.

Describe the methods and strategies that you are using: The reform of these courses is based both on current theories of teaching and learning, and on a change model that emerges from the shared vision of all the stakeholders and that evolves based on feedback from assessments about how we are meeting our goals.

Describe the evaluation methods that you used (or intended to use) to determine whether the project or effort achieved the desired goals and outcomes: Our reform efforts are driven by the following research questions: 1. In what ways do faculty transform their practices across the STEM gateway courses as new common outcomes and expectations are developed based upon core disciplinary ideas blended with scientific practices? 2. How does student understanding of core disciplinary ideas and science practices change, over time and across disciplines? 3. Are student changes in understanding and use of knowledge correlated with faculty practices, assessments and learning materials? 4. How does student retention, both in courses and majors, change as courses are redesigned?

Impacts of project or effort on students, fellow faculty, department or institution. If no time to have an impact, anticipated impacts: As we answer these four research questions, we will develop a model for sustainable change in targeted gateway courses based on collective faculty engagement. This model will be transferable to other institutions.

Describe any unexpected challenges you encountered and your methods for dealing with them: Although it is not unexpected, faculty commitment and willingness to change is always a challenge.

Describe your completed dissemination activities and your plans for continuing dissemination: The AAU project began in June. The reform of Organismal and Population Biology (see T. Long abstract) is complete (but always a work in progress) and disseminated to a number of faculty across colleges.

Acknowledgements: To all the faculty and administrators who are involved in the reform of the STEM gateway courses.