Biology Scholars Program: Transitions 2014-2015
description
Transcript of Biology Scholars Program: Transitions 2014-2015
Biology Scholars Program: Transitions 2014-2015
Marcy Peteroy-Kelly, Pace University: Journal of Microbiology and Biology Education
Jodie Krontiris-Litowitz, Youngstown State University: Advances in Physiology Education
Elisa Stone, University of California, Berkeley: CBE – Life Sciences Education
Agenda – How is the residency organized?
1. Critical friend/facilitator teams 2. Activities, consultations for feedback,
writing time3. Concurrent sessions for networking
What do you want to accomplish during this institute?
Overview and Goals
Session 1: Identify Writing Goals and Work Plan for the Institute
1:45 pm What Is, What Works, How and Why Does It Work, What’s Possible?
Brief Introduction
Activity: Participants write about and discuss: What is your research question? What is your rationale for asking the question? Does this question address a significant problem?
2:15 pm Draft Manuscript Review
Activity: Discuss draft manuscript with critical friend and facilitator (Assignment #4).
3:15 pm Break3:30 pm Individual Planning/Writing Time
Based upon feedback from previous discussion, outline plan for next steps and identify needs.
4:30 pm Discussion of Plans and Needs
Activity: Share plans and needs with facilitator5:00 pm Break
In general, we ask the following questions when we review a manuscript:
1. Is your study novel?2. Is everything aligned?3. Were the correct statistical tests used to
analyze the data?4. Are the conclusions supported by the
data?
What is, What Works, How and Why Does it Work, and What’s Possible?
Answer the following questions on your own (Time: approx. 5 minutes)1. What is your research question?2. What is your rationale for asking that question?3. Does the question address a significant problem?
Share your answers with another scholar (not your critical friend, Time: approx. 5 minutes each).
Share your answers with your critical friend (Time: approx. 5 minutes each).
Activity:
Draft Manuscript Review Guidelines
Critiquing science experiments The 50/5 paradigm Guidelines for reviewing manuscripts
1. ‘The Sandwich’: +/-/+2. Clarification questions vs Probing questions
‘Please explain…’ vs ‘I wonder if…/I noticed that…’3. Process check: ‘How are you thinking about your paper now?’
For the next hour (2:15-3:15), meet with your critical friend and facilitator to discuss your manuscripts. The following rooms have been designated for your teams to use for work during the Institute:
1. Marcy’s team: Blue Room2. Jodie’s team: Room 2333. Elisa’s team: Room 104 Your first break will begin at 3:15 in the Blue Room.
Draft Manuscript Review
Use this time to outline your plans for your next steps in drafting your manuscript and identifying your needs based upon the conversations you had with your critical friend and facilitator.
Time: 3:30-4:30
Be prepared to discuss your plans and needs with your teams at 4:30.
You will have a break at 5:00.
Individual Writing Time
Session 2: At 5:15, we will join the Research Residency Facilitators and Scholars for introductions and discussions about your SoTL work. The goal of the evening sessions are to begin to establish networking relationships.
Homework: Each critical friend team will receive a manuscript written by their facilitator. Please read and critically review the manuscript and be prepared to summarize the manuscript and your review with your fellow scholars tomorrow.
Breakfast will be served at 8:00 tomorrow morning in the Blue Room.
Session 2: Network with Facilitators and Scholars AND Homework!!!!
Thursday, July 24, 2014
Session 3 Objective: Identify Tools Required to Analyze your Data
8:00 am
Breakfast
8:30 am
Quantitative and Qualitative Data Analysis – What’s the Difference?
Christine Pribbenow, Wisconsin Center for Education ResearchSteve Nold, University of Wisconsin-StoutConcurrent with Research Residency
10:30 am
Break
10:45 am
Writing/Reflection Time
Reflect on your data and the statistical tools you used to analyze your data in the context of the Data Analysis talk and refine any troublesome sections. Christine Pribbenow will be available for consultation.
12:30 pm
Lunch
Concurrent with Research Residency
Reflect on your data and the statistical tools you used to analyze your data in the context of the Data Analysis talk and refine any troublesome sections. Christine Pribbenow will be available for
consultation.
Time: 10:45-12:30
Lunch will begin at 12:30.
Writing/Reflection Time
Session 4: Appreciate the Journey of the Manuscript Preparation Process
1:30 pm Publish and Flourish
Kari Wester, ASM
2:00 pm Jigsaw with Journal Readings 1
Scholars team up in groups of three to discuss each manuscript.
2:30 pm Review and Discuss Reviewer’s Comments
Critical partners receive reviewer’s comments for each manuscript for review and discussion.
Facilitators will not be present for this discussion.
3:00 pm Facilitator Journey
Scholars reconvene with their critical partners and the facilitator that authored the manuscript they reviewed to complete the journey to publication story with the facilitators.
3:30 pm Jigsaw with Journal Readings 2
Scholars team up in original jigsaw groups to discuss facilitator journeys.
3:45 pm Consultations with Facilitators
Publish & FlourishOriginal Presentation by Dr. Tara Gray
Writing is difficult Regardless of what you write Lifetime project
Even good writers receive criticism This paper is…
“Very poorly done.” “Very badly prepared.” “Plagued by myriad problems.” “So badly written that few persons will have the patience
to try to make sense of it.” Steps counter the difficulty
Tailor steps to suit your needs
A Twelve Step Program (p. 1)
Daily Writing, Record Keeping, and Accountability: The Effect on Productivity (Boice 1989:609)
Managing Time
First group (attended workshops but chose to
continue writing occasionally, in big blocks of time)
Second group (attended workshops and agreed to
write daily, and record it)
Third group (attended workshops and agreed to write
daily, record it, and be held accountable for writing daily)
Pages written or revised per year
17
64
157
Why doesn’t every scholar keep records? Too rudimentary What to include How to keep record
Use a spreadsheet, sticky notes, or a formal log (p. 3)
Share your records weekly with a Sponsor or Buddy Sponsor: non-reciprocal Buddy: reciprocal Choose someone who believes in daily writing and will hold
your feet to the fire!
Who will you choose? Colleague, fellow Transitions Scholar, facilitator, Teaching &
Writing center on campus
When should you report? Daily for 30 days Weekly thereafter
Organize around key sentences
Key sentences are like topic sentences Announce topic simply, with little detail, without
trying to prove the point Tell what the rest of the paragraph is about
Key sentences differ from topic sentences in that they need not be the first sentence
Revising
Let’s Practice (p.5-6)
Example 1. Try thinking of paragraphs as having two parts: the issue and the discussion. The issue is a “short introductory section of the paragraph, or overture if you will,” which includes a transition and announces the topic. The discussion is the longer portion of the paragraph. The discussion “explains, elaborates, supports, qualifies, argues for what the writer stated in the issue. The issue promises; the discussion delivers. . . . If you write a passage that does not seem to hang together, seems uncentered or out of focus, you may have made a promise but didn’t deliver, or you may have delivered on promises you didn’t make (Williams and Colomb, 1990:92).
Example 1. Try thinking of paragraphs as having two parts: the issue and the discussion. The issue is a “short introductory section of the paragraph, or overture if you will,” which includes a transition and announces the topic. The discussion is the longer portion of the paragraph. The discussion “explains, elaborates, supports, qualifies, argues for what the writer stated in the issue. The issue promises; the discussion delivers. . . . If you write a passage that does not seem to hang together, seems uncentered or out of focus, you may have made a promise but didn’t deliver, or you may have delivered on promises you didn’t make (Williams and Colomb, 1990:92).
Example 2. “We learn rules for actions better when those rules are structured, whether we learn by practicing them, by watching a teacher demonstrate them, or by listening to a teacher explain them. But do we learn better from a demonstration or an explanation? We are likely to learn more when we watch a demonstration if our language skills are so weak that we cannot understand words easily, or if the teacher cannot verbalize the rules. We are also likely to learn more from watching a demonstration when we must quickly coordinate intricate actions such as learning to ride a bicycle, but the explanation for them is too cumbersome. Finally, we are likely to learn more from a demonstration if the action is difficult or unfamiliar and the teacher lectures about it at length. On the other hand, we will learn an action better from an explanation if we can deftly translate explanations into actions and then store the information” (Williams and Colomb 1990:87).
Example 2. “We learn rules for actions better when those rules are structured, whether we learn by practicing them, by watching a teacher demonstrate them, or by listening to a teacher explain them. But do we learn better from a demonstration or an explanation? We are likely to learn more when we watch a demonstration if our language skills are so weak that we cannot understand words easily, or if the teacher cannot verbalize the rules. We are also likely to learn more from watching a demonstration when we must quickly coordinate intricate actions such as learning to ride a bicycle, but the explanation for them is too cumbersome. Finally, we are likely to learn more from a demonstration if the action is difficult or unfamiliar and the teacher lectures about it at length. On the other hand, we will learn an action better from an explanation if we can deftly translate explanations into actions and then store the information” (Williams and Colomb 1990:87).
Every section of your paper should have a key sentence (Intro, Methods, Results, Discussion)
Use key sentences as an outline for review Use your word processor to hide all text
except headings and key sentences (p. 7-8) Then view or print your outline
Read your list. Ask yourself how the key sentences could better communicate the purpose (thesis) to the audience
Read your list AGAIN. Ask yourself how the key sentences could be better organized (more logical/coherent)
Other uses Start your writing sessions daily Write abstracts Grade stacks of papers Work with thesis or dissertation students
Share early drafts with non-experts and later drafts with experts
Learn how to listen Respond to each specific comment
Get Help
TAA is a non-profit, interdisciplinary professional organization that: Advocates for academic authors and
excellence in teaching materials Offers one-year gift memberships to
workshop participants Provides traveling workshops Provides monthly e-mail column by
Dr. Tara Gray
Text and Academic Authors
Make sure to read your prose out loud
Select appropriate journals: Read your bibliography to find target journals Read up on journal’s scope and intended audience Pick a section you’d like to submit to and read
previously published papers Ask experts and Experts Contact journal editors directly!
See p. 9 for how to query
Polish & Let Go
Kick it out the door and make ’em say “No.”
Three things interfere with submitting: Pride Perfectionism Fear of rejection
In education journals 15% of first-time submissions are accepted
with revisions 75% of R & Rs are accepted with revisions
(Henson 1999:134)
So, celebrate every R&R!
Goal: Facilitators share one of their journeys in publishing a SoTL manuscript from start to finish.
Session 1 (2-2:30): Jigsaw with Journal Readings: Get into groups of three (each group should include one member from each critical friend team). Each paper should be summarized to the group, in turn.
Session 2 (2:30-3): Reviewers’ Comments: Critical friend teams receives the journal reviewers’ comments for the paper they reviewed. Read the comments and discuss. The facilitators will not be present for this discussion.
Session 3 (3-3:30): Facilitator’s Journey: Each critical friend team will be rejoined by their facilitator so that the facilitator can complete the story of their journey to publishing the paper.
Session 4 (3:30-3:45): Jigsaw with Journal Readings 2: Discuss anything you learned from the facilitator’s journeys with your original “Jigsaw” group to close out the session.
Activity: Journal Journeys
Work with facilitators of your choosing to discuss sections of your paper that you are having difficulty with.
The facilitators present will include:1. Marcy Peteroy-Kelly, Pace University: Journal of Microbiology and
Biology Education2. Jodie Krontiris-Litowitz, Youngstown State University: Advances in
Physiology Education3. Elisa Stone, University of California, Berkeley: CBE – Life Sciences
Education4. Stephen Nold, University of Wisconsin-Stout
Time: 3:45-4:30
Consultations with Facilitators
Evening Activities
4:30 pm Individual Writing Time
Based upon feedback from consultations develop more polished version of most troublesome section(s).
5:30 pm Dinner
Goal: Networking time – Who could I continue these conversations with AFTER the residency? Who faces the same issues? Who has a similar research question or teaches similar classes?
Concurrent with Research Residency6:30 pm Individual Writing Time
Based upon feedback from consultations develop more polished version of most troublesome section(s).
8:30 pm Adjournment
Breakfast will be served at 8:00 am in the Blue Room.
Friday, July 25, 2014
Session Objective 5: Refine Writing Based Upon Institute Experience and Participate in Research Group Presentations 8:00 am Breakfast8:30 am Individual Writing Time
Based upon feedback from yesterday, develop more polished version of your manuscripts.
10:30 am
Developing Searchable Manuscript TitlesMarcy Peteroy-Kelly, Pace University
11:30 am
LunchConcurrent with Research Residency
Developing Searchable TitlesOriginal Presentation By: Dr. Beronda Montgomery, Michigan
State UniversityPresented By: Marcy Peteroy-Kelly
What makes a good title and a good abstract?
Key elements
Tips for writing
Overview
Title/abstract summarizes your workThey should be more than a general summary. They should convey the thesis of you work and give insight into the major findings.
Fine-tuned for your audience
First step in attracting a potential readerAllows the reader to judge whether it would serve his or her purposes to read the entire manuscript
Purpose of the Title/Abstract
Parts of your paper most people will seeFirst (and sometimes, only) parts of a paper that can be viewed by everyone unless paper is ‘open access’
Should be specific and conciseShould be specific enough to describe the contents of the paper, highlighting the novelty/relevance and the major findings
Should be distinctTry to make titles distinct enough from other similar works that readers can discern impact and novelty of your work from the start
Key elements should be included in bothUse keywords for indexing – facilitates the paper making it to your target audience
Best way to get people interestedPeople judge by the title whether to read the abstractThe reading of the abstract will influence whether the entire paper will be read
General Tips: Title and Abstract
Keep it short
Address main point or content of the study AND be specificTitle should be specific enough to describe the subject matter, contents of the paper, and perhaps to allow a reader to ascertain you hypothesis or given insight into major results/conclusions
Use specific, descriptive words that strongly support the content of your manuscript
Check for correct syntax (word order/sentence structure)
Tips for Writing a Title
Keep in mind 3 elements – emphasis, impact and keywords
Keep the title focused on the most important point(s) or finding(s) that you want readers to remember.
It is OK to give away the ‘end of the story’ as long as you do so in a way that makes the reader want to read to know the details.
Indicate what is novel or innovative about your work directly in the title
Be specific about relationshipsFor example, use “reduced” or “increases” instead of “influences” or “impacts”
Tips for Writing a Title Continued
Bacterial Responses to Stress
VERSUS
Oxidative Stress Response of Synechocystis sp PCC 6893 due to UV-B Exposure
Titles: Be Specific
Poor: Mouse Courtship Behavior
Progress: The Effects of Estrogen on the Nose-Twitch Courtship Behavior in Mice
Why? Key words identify a specific behavior; a modifying agent, and the experimental organism
Better: Estrogen Stimulates Intensity of the Nose-Twitch Courtship Behavior in Mice
Why? In addition to above, this title contains key result
http://www.biosciencewriters.com/Writing-Strong-Titles-for-Research-Manuscripts.aspx
Titles: Poor, Progress, Better
Brainstorm and write down as many titles as you can think of in a few minutes
Ask other to read and suggest titles
Compose and revise to arrive at a title that catches the eye AND conveys the thesis of your work in one formulation.
Generating Titles
Self-contained summary of work
Emphasizes key results and significance
Succinct, clear and accurateFollow defined word limit of guidelines to authors
Abstracts
Use active voice
Start drafting the abstract by choosing your best lines from the manuscript
Be logical in structuring your abstract
References usually excluded
Review and revise
Abstract Tips
Background Hypothesis Course studied/subjects of study Methods Results Conclusions
Parts of an Abstract
Approximately 1-2 sentences
Introduces general topic
Introduces importance of topic from the very beginning – it is your job to highlight the relevance
Background
2 sentences maximum
Describes the question being investigated or purpose of the investigation
State hypothesis succinctly and clearly
Hypothesis
Introduce course(s), program(s) that were studied
Describe research subjects
Course studied/Subjects of Study
Approximately 2 sentences
Introduce general methods used
Methods
Approximately 1-2 sentences
Summarize key results that are specific to study
What should the reader remember as the key finding(s) from your work? OR What do you want them to remember if it is the only part of the paper they read?
Results
Summarize the significance and impact of the findings
Be specific and place your results into a broader context
“The Big Finish”
Conclusions
Copy the text of your abstract into Wordle to create a word-cloud. … http://www.wordle.net/
“Wordle is a toy for generating “word clouds” from text that you provide. The clouds give greater prominence to words that appear more frequently in the source text.”
The more prominent words can be used as keywords to help you come up with a title.
Use the Abstract to Help you Determine a Title
My Title: A Discussion Group Program Enhances the Conceptual Reasoning Skills of Students Enrolled in a Large Lecture Format Introductory Biology Course.
Wordle Example:
Consider the relevance of the TITLE and abstract beyond immediate use.
The title represents you experience, breadth and knowledge – For example, when it is listed on your CV.
Good websites for help with titles and abstracts: http://
www.biosciencewriters.com/Writing-Strong-Titles-for-Research-Manuscripts.aspx
http://www.biomedcentral.com/authors/abstracts http://
www.asbmb.org/asbmbtoday/asbmbtoday_article.aspx?id=13477&page_id=1
Concluding Remarks
Group Presentations and Goal Setting
12:30 pm
Group PresentationsGoal: Sharing of work and soliciting feedback from writing sessions
2:30 pm Break2:45 pm Individual Writing Time
Based upon feedback from this morning and early afternoon, develop more polished of your manuscript.
4:45 pm Break5:00 pm Goal Setting
Activity: Define the short-term and long-term goals required for the completion and submission of your manuscript
5:30 pm Presentation of GoalsActivity: Share your short-term and long-term goals with the group for feedback
6:30 pm Dinner on your Own
Each scholar will share their progress with the entire group.
Scholars and facilitators will provide feedback to assist presenting scholar.
Time: 12:30-2:30
There will be a break at 2:30.
Group Presentations
Develop a more polished version of your manuscript based upon feedback you received during the Group Presentations Session.
Time: 2:45-4:45
There will be a break at 4:45.
Individual Writing Time
Define the short-term and long-term goals required for submission of your manuscript.
Time: 5:00-5:30
Be prepared to present your goals to the group between 5:30-6:30.
Dinner will be on your own at 6:30.
Breakfast will be served at 8:00 am in the Blue Room. Your photo will be taken during breakfast.
Goal Setting Activity
Saturday, July 26, 2014
Session Objective: Identify Writing Timeline
8:00 am Breakfast/Your Photo Will Be Taken
9:00 am Plans for the Future
Activity: Draft a feasible timeline for completing and submitting your manuscript based upon the discussions from yesterday evening. Are there additional studies or resources to complete your
manuscript? To which venues will you submit? Who will act as your critical friend?
9:30 am Presentation of Timeline and Work Plans
Activity: What is your plan for completing your manuscript? What will you do in short term? Medium term? Long term? What do you need from the facilitators? From ASM? From others?
Draft a timeline for completing and submitting your manuscript. Consider the answers to the following questions as you draft your timeline:
1. Are there additional studies or resources required to complete your manuscript?
2. To which venue will you submit?3. Who will act as your off-site critical friend?
Time: 9:00-9:30
Be prepared to discuss your timeline with your critical friend and facilitator from 9:30-10:30. During the discussion, please work with your facilitator to determine check-in times during your year in residency.
Plans for the Future
Institute Debriefing
10:30 am
Institute Debriefing and ClosureLoretta Brancaccio-Taras, Kingsborough Community College, CUNYMarcy Peteroy-Kelly, Pace University-NYCKelly Gull, ASMChristine Pribbenow, Wisconsin Center for Education Research Evaluations Collaborating through SoTL Marching orders and where to go from here
11:30 am
Adjournment