Transforming tertiary education: overview of an AKO Aotearoa project involving a large 100-level Cell Biology

class.

Rosie Bradshaw, Maggie Hartnett, Gemma Cartwright, Natalie Burr, Ewen Cameron, Ben Kennedy & Zoe Jordens

Applying the Carl Wieman Science Education Initiative (CWSEI) Model within the New Zealand Tertiary Environment

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 20110

100

200

300

400

500

600

162101 Biology of Cells

PNALB

Year

Stud

ent

num

bers

Students have diverse aims, background and abilities

BVScBScBMLSB Vet TechB Food TechB EngSchoolOther

The team

• Six science classes: four in Geology at Canterbury and two in biology at Massey

• Mixed team- Education specialists, motivated science lecturers and research assistants.

The aim• Improve student engagement and learning by:

- implementing ‘interventions’- measuring the effects on engagement & learning

based on

The methodInterventions:

• Improved learning goals and alignment• Emphasis on relevance• Interaction in lectures: activities and ‘clickers’

Measuring effects:• classroom observations engagement• attitude survey• ‘knowledge’ survey

learning

The cell shown here is a human diploid cell destined to undergo meiosis to make an egg cell. The cell is heterozygous for genes A and D. Assuming no crossing over occurs, choose the diagram that best represents what this cell would look like in metaphase of Meiosis I.

D D

d d

A A

a a

D dA aBD d

A a

Ca d

A

A D

D Dd d

A Aa a

D E

The method162101 Biology of Cells

PRE POSTsemester 1 2011

1 2 3surveys

162212 Microbial World

PRE POSTsemester 2 2010 semester 2 2011

1 2 surveys

1 2 surveys

Results: Classroom observations • Observe lecture material and teaching style• Measure students engagement through observation

• Observe lecture material and teaching style• Measure students engagement through observation

Results: Classroom observations

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

6.00

7.00

8.00

9.00

10.00 Pre-intervention Post-intervention

Results: Classroom observations

0 2 3 5 6 6 7 11 11 13 14 14 16 17 20 22 24 25 27 28 30 34 35 36 40 41 44 45 470

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Observation 2

Stu

dent

Eng

agem

ent (

out o

f 10)

Tour of the Cell Lecture: Pre-Intervention

Skimmedcontent

Overview

Movienear end oflecture

enthusiasm

Time (mins)

Results: Classroom observations

0 5 10 14 15 17 19 21 23 23 24 25 27 29 30 31 32 36 38 40 41 41 42 430

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Observation 14

Time (min)

Stu

dent

Eng

agem

ent (

out o

f 10)

Analogy

QuestionQuestion

Lecture Lecture Overview Learning

objectivesDrawingactivity

Analogy

Next sessionand vote

whether to persevere with

clickersProkaryotic gene expression lecture (post-intervention)

Lecture Link to lab

Results: Attitude surveySignificant shifts compared to ‘expert-like attitudes’ (for all of the example Qs ‘strongly agree’ is expert-like and therefore favourable)

Category(4 of 7 shown)

Favourable Unfavourable Example of question(8 – 10 Qs in each category)

Real World Connection

ns To understand biology, I sometimes think about my personal experiences and relate them to the topic being analyzed.

Enjoyment ns If I had plenty of time, I would take a biology class outside of my major requirements just for fun.

Problem-solving effort

ns I actively try to relate what is presented in biology to what I have learnt in other courses.

Reasoning ns When not pressed for time, I will continue to work on a biology problem until I understand why something works the way it does.

shifts in attitude over the whole semester :ns not significant; got worse (less ‘favourable’); got better (less ‘unfavourable’)

Results: Knowledge survey

Questions based on:

Survey 1 Survey 2 Survey 3 Mean gain

PRE10 Qs

21.4 ± 14.3 32.7 ± 16.0 39.3 ± 18.5 11.3 ± 16.1

POST10 Qs

20.9 ± 15.2 27.1 ± 14.6 41.6 ± 19.1 14.5 ± 19.8

PRE POSTsemester 1 2011

1 2 3

Values are % test scores: mean ± SD for 161 matched surveys(questions were designed to be difficult!)

Two-tailed paired T-test of significant difference between pre and post mean gains shows no significant difference (P = 0.103)

Results: Knowledge survey

Values are means of matched % test scores

Questions based on:

Mean % gain

final exam >80%

Mean % gain

final exam 60-79%

Mean % gain

final exam 40-59%

Mean % gain

final exam 20-39%

Mean % gain

final exam <20%

Mean % gain ALL

students

PRE10 Qs

20.0 15.8 8.6 1.7 -1.7 11.3

POST10 Qs

32.9 15.9 13.6 2.2 1.7 14.5

P (paired T-test) (n)

0.007(14)

0.964 (64)

0.424 (59)

0.941 (18)

0.788 (6)

0.103 (161)

Conclusions: Most of the ‘post’ (interventions) gain was in the top student groupMore needs to be done to facilitate learning in other groups!BUT - there are many limitations to this survey.

- deleting toughest 2 Qs from each survey only 40-59% show sig gain

To assist my learning in lectures, I would prefer:

A) 'Traditional style' information delivery lectures

B) Mixture of clickers/interactive questions and 'traditional style', with some recommended reading prior to lecture.

C) Completely interactive (clickers/activities/discussion) with mandatory pre-reading and on-line pre-lecture quiz.

Results: A 5%, B 70%, C 25% (n=207)

But what do students think?Clicker-vote at end of 162101 2011:

ConclusionsNo increase shown in student engagementBUT - engagement declines over the semester - positive feedback on use of clickers

Significant increase in knowledge gain after interventionsBUT - only with top performing students (final exam >80%) - mid students (40-59% FE) gained when toughest Qs removed.

Mixture of attitude shiftsBUT - some attitudes change over the semester anyway (eg. enjoyment)

So – was it worth it?Overall I think my teaching has improved- Better learning goals, etc- Improved style of interactive questions& many ideas of how to improve more…

AcknowledgementsZoe Jordens – Massey Project Leader Maggie Hartnett – Education Consultant Gemma Cartwright, Natalie Burr – Research AssistantsEwen Cameron – T&L director, MUHEC approvalBen Kennedy - Canterbury Uni. and overall project leader

Applying the Carl Wieman Science Education Initiative (CWSEI) Model within the New Zealand Tertiary Environment