Documenting Student Learning of Basic Concepts in Gene Expression
Documenting Student Learning of Basic Concepts in Gene Expression
Undergraduate Researchers:
Sydney Carter (carte135@miamioh.edu), Biology Major, Premedical Studies Co-Major, General Business Minor
Jack Davis (davisj48@miamioh.edu), Biology Major, Premedical Studies Co-Major
Braden Tackett (tacketbd@miamioh.edu), Biology Major, Premedical Studies Co-Major
Advisor: Dr. Joyce Fernandes (joyce.fernandes@miamioh.edu) Department of Biology & Office of Research for Undergraduates
Miami University, Oxford OH
BIO 203, Introduction to cell Biology is a course sandwiched between Introductory Biology, BIO 116 and Upper level courses such as Genetics 342. Instructors teaching 200 and 300 level courses lean toward an assumption that fundamental concepts taught in the courses will not need to be taught in as much depth. However students prefer the basics to be taught again. To what extent can intentional, active learning strategies help students to better grasp core concepts and better position them to learn advanced material?
Having taken the 200-level course, Introduction to Cell Biology, three students worked with the instructor the following semester to assist with review sessions. The undergraduate associates (UAs) met once a week with the instructor to review weekly instruction and plan the scope of weekly review sessions. The UAs were involved in a study to document the learning of basic concepts in gene expression. The UAs were enrolled in one credit hour of independent study and completed a human subjects training for this project.
Having taken the 200-level course, Introduction to Cell Biology, three students worked with the instructor the following semester to assist with review sessions. The undergraduate associates (UAs) met once a week with the instructor to review weekly instruction and plan the scope of weekly review sessions. The UAs were involved in a study to document the learning of basic concepts in gene expression, and completed a human subjects training for this purpose. In-class worksheets with prompts provided by the instructor were analyzed for students undestanding of the meaning of gene expression. Three sets of workseets deployed in succession over a 3 week period were analyzed. Understanding of the material was scored on a 3 point scale. 1=Low [needs a lot of work]; 2= has basic understanding; 3= Gets it. For the meaning of gene expression, the average score was 1.82 (SEM =0.26) on the first attempt. On the third attempt, the average score was 2.43 (SEM=0.65), indicating a trend toward improvement in understanding. Two tailed T-test assuming equal variance between the two attempts was 0.07, indicating that there is not a significant difference, and that more data points may be necessary. Sample size was 11-15. In a survey, students were asked to identify what they could do better during in-class instruction. 50% indicated that they needed to pay more attention, be engaged and ask questions. The rest identified taking good notes (32%) and preparing themselves ahead of time so that they could take better notes.
Students responded to two questions over a period of three weeks:
(1) What is gene expression? Tests prior knowledge
(2) What is the difference between a promoter and an enhancer? Tests current knowledge.
Three sets of responses were coded on a 1-3 scale
1 = needs a lot of work (error prone) 2 = has some understanding 3 = Gets it
QUESTION 1: Gene Expression
Attempt 1: 1.82 + 0.26 (n= 11)
Attempt 2: 1.82 + 0.26 (n=13)
Attempt 3: 2.43 + 0.65 (n=14)
Two tailed T-test: 2 vs 3, p=0.08
QUESTION 2: Promoter vs Enhancer
Attempt 1: 1.83 + 0.22
Attempt 2: 1.3 + 0.12
Attempt 3: 2.18 + 0.19
Two tailed T-test: 2 vs 3, p=0.01
Sample size: Pre Test - 36; Post Test- 38
Where does replication occur?
a. Nuclear Membrane
b. Nucleus
c. Ribosomes
d. Plasma membrane
e. Extracellular Matrix
Pre test: 84%
Post test: 84%
Where does transcription occur?
a. Nuclear Membrane
b. Nucleus
c. Ribosomes
d. Plasma membrane
e. Extracellular Matrix
Pre test: 17%
Post test: 74%
Where does translation occur?
a. Nuclear Membrane
b. Nucleus
c. Ribosomes
d. Plasma membrane
e. Extracellular Matrix
Pre test: 17%
Post test: 74%
What is the product of replication?
a. RNA
b. DNA
c. Protein
Pre test: 81%
Post test: 95%
What is the product of transcription?
a. RNA
b. DNA
c. Protein
Pre test: 26%
Post test: 92%
What is the product of translation?
a. RNA
b. DNA
c. Protein
Pre test: 27%
Post test: 92%
Students enrolled in multiple sections of Cell Biology (BIO 203) at Miami University completed a learning survey. 71 student responses were recorded.
Better Pacing and More Explanations - 34%
Better Resources/Slides - 18%
Good as is - 12%
Pay More Attention - 35%
Take Better Notes - 32%
Review Material Before Class - 17%
Ask Questions - 15%
Review Earlier and More Frequently - 52%
Review Textbook - 23%
Do you examine the figure and figure description in the slides/text to examine the 'players' and understand the "emerging" story?
Do you synthesize your notes later in the day, after class?
Do you read the paragraph in which the figure number appears in the textbook, and the corresponding section, and make additional notes?
Revisit how to use worksheets to assess learning. Do students find it difficult to express themselves in writing?
Pre-test surveys indicate that students understand replication better than transcription/translation. How can these concepts be better reinforced earlier to introduce advanced concepts in gene expression at the 200-level.
Post-test survey data indicates better understanding of the central dogma in the 200-level class, 90%, but understanding of the advanced concepts is 50-60%.
The learning survey indicates that students struggle to stay focussed and take good notes; they recognize that reviewing material is important for learning. Can homework, study groups and weekly quizzes improve learning?
Woodin T, Carter VC, Fletcher L. (2010) Vision and change in biology undergraduate education, a call for action--initial responses. CBE Life Sci Educ. 9(2):71-3. doi: 10.1187/cbe.10-03-0044. PMID: 20516350; PMCID: PMC2879380.
Cook E,Kennedy E,McGuire SY. (2013) Effect of teaching metacognitive learning strategies on performance in general chemistry courses.J Chem Educ 90: 961–967, doi:10.1021/ed300686h.
McGuire, S. Y., & McGuire, S. (2018). Teach yourself how to learn: strategies you can use to ace any course at any level. First edition. Sterling, Virginia, Stylus Publishing, LLC.