1887

Method to Increase Undergraduate Laboratory Student Confidence in Performing Independent Research

    Authors: Colton E. Kempton1, K. Scott Weber1, Steven M. Johnson1,*
    VIEW AFFILIATIONS HIDE AFFILIATIONS
    Affiliations: 1: Department of Microbiology and Molecular Biology, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT 84602
    AUTHOR AND ARTICLE INFORMATION AUTHOR AND ARTICLE INFORMATION
    Source: J. Microbiol. Biol. Educ. April 2017 vol. 18 no. 1 doi:10.1128/jmbe.v18i1.1230
MyBook is a cheap paperback edition of the original book and will be sold at uniform, low price.
  • XML
    27.12 Kb
  • PDF
    410.01 Kb
  • HTML
    30.72 Kb

    Abstract:

    The goal of an undergraduate laboratory course should be not only to introduce the students to biology methodologies and techniques, but also to teach them independent analytical thinking skills and proper experiment design. This is especially true for advanced biology laboratory courses that undergraduate students typically take as a junior or senior in college. Many courses achieve the goal of teaching techniques, but fail to approach the larger goal of teaching critical thinking, experimental design, and student independence. Here we describe a study examining the application of the scaffolding instructional philosophy in which students are taught molecular techniques with decreasing guidance to force the development of analytical thinking skills and prepare undergraduate students for independent laboratory research. This method was applied to our advanced molecular biology laboratory class and resulted in an increase of confidence among the undergraduate students in their abilities to perform independent research.

Key Concept Ranking

DNA Fingerprinting
0.5633987
Molecular Techniques
0.5619981
DNA Restriction Enzymes
0.542962
0.5633987

References & Citations

1. Modell HI, Michael JA 1993 Promoting active learning in the life-science classroom—defining the issues Ann New York Acad Sci 701 1 7 10.1111/j.1749-6632.1993.tb19770.x http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-6632.1993.tb19770.x
2. Cox DD, Davis LV 1972 The context of biological education: the case for change Commission on Undergraduate Education in Biological Sciences Washington, DC
3. McComas WF 1998 The nature of science in science education: rationales and strategies Kluwer Academic Publishers Dordrecht, Netherlands
4. Boyer Commission on Educating Undergraduates in the Research University 1998 Reinventing undergraduate education—a blueprint for America’s research universities State University of New York at Stony Brook for the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching Stony Brook, NY
5. National Research Council (USA) Commit tee on Undergraduate Biology Education to Prepare Research Scientists for the 21 st Century 2003 Bio 2010: transforming undergraduate education for future research biologists The National Academies Press Washington, DC
6. National Rese arch Council (USA) Committee on Development of an Addendum to the National Science Education Standards on Scientific Inquiry 2000 Inquiry and the National science education standards: a guide for teaching and learning The National Academy Press Washington, DC
7. 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 71 73 10.1187/cbe.10-03-0044 20516350 2879380 http://dx.doi.org/10.1187/cbe.10-03-0044
8. Weber KS, Jensen JL, Johnson SM 2015 Anticipation of personal genomics data enhances interest and learning environment in genomics and molecular biology undergraduate courses PLoS One 10 e0133486 10.1371/journal.pone.0133486 26241308 4524698 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0133486
9. DiPasquale DM, Mason CL, Kolkhorst FW 2003 Exercise in inquiry J Coll Sci Teach 32 388 393
10. Handelsman J, Ebert-May D, Beichner R, Bruns P, Chang A, DeHaan R, Gentile J, Lauffer S, Stewart J, Tilghman SM, Wood WB 2004 Education. Scientific teaching Science 304 521 522 10.1126/science.1096022 15105480 http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1096022
11. Beed PL, Hawkins EM, Roller CM 1991 Moving learners toward independence—the power of scaffolded instruction Read Teach 44 648 655
12. Bruner JS 1975 The ontogenesis of speech acts J Child Lang 2 1 19 10.1017/S0305000900000866 http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0305000900000866
13. Vygotsky LS 1978 Mind in society: the development of higher psychological processes Harvard University Press Cambridge, MA
14. Invitrogen 2007 PureLink™ Genomic DNA Kits, for purification of genomic DNA, User Manual, Version A Life Technologies Corporation Carlsbad, CA
15. Invitrogen 2010 PureLink ® quick gel extraction and PCR purification combo kit, for purification of DNA fragments from agarose gels and rapid, efficient purification of PCR products, user manual, MAN0001636 Life Technologies Corporation Carlsbad, CA
16. Qiagen 2002 QIAprep ® Miniprep handbook, second ed Qiagen Hilden, Germany
17. Finnzymes 2008 Phusion™ site-directed mutagenesis kit, instructions, Version 1.1 New England Biolabs, Inc Ipswich, MA
18. Invitrogen 1999 Zero Blunt ® TOPO ® PCR cloning kit, five-minute cloning of blunt-end PCR products, user manual, version N Invitrogen Corporation Carlsbad, CA
19. Ambion 2007 TRIzol ® reagent, instructions Life Technologies Corporation Carlsbad, CA
20. Ambion 2008 Instruction manual, NorthernMax ®-Gly, Glyoxal-based system for northern blots, P/N 1946M Revision B Applied Biosystems Carlsbad, CA
21. Johnson SM, Lin SY, Slack FJ 2003 The time of appearance of the C. elegans let-7 microRNA is transcriptionally controlled utilizing a temporal regulatory element in its promoter Dev Biol 259 364 379 10.1016/S0012-1606(03)00202-1 12871707 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0012-1606(03)00202-1

Supplemental Material

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journal/jmbe/10.1128/jmbe.v18i1.1230
2017-04-21
2019-02-15

Abstract:

The goal of an undergraduate laboratory course should be not only to introduce the students to biology methodologies and techniques, but also to teach them independent analytical thinking skills and proper experiment design. This is especially true for advanced biology laboratory courses that undergraduate students typically take as a junior or senior in college. Many courses achieve the goal of teaching techniques, but fail to approach the larger goal of teaching critical thinking, experimental design, and student independence. Here we describe a study examining the application of the scaffolding instructional philosophy in which students are taught molecular techniques with decreasing guidance to force the development of analytical thinking skills and prepare undergraduate students for independent laboratory research. This method was applied to our advanced molecular biology laboratory class and resulted in an increase of confidence among the undergraduate students in their abilities to perform independent research.

Highlighted Text: Show | Hide
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/jmbe/18/1/jmbe-18-18.html?itemId=/content/journal/jmbe/10.1128/jmbe.v18i1.1230&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Figures

Image of FIGURE 1

Click to view

FIGURE 1

Overview of the application of the weaning philosophy and approach. The weaning approach is applied to any laboratory class by initially providing students with protocols that are highly modified by the professor (1 and 2), followed by protocols with decreasing amounts of professor modifications and protocols with no professor modifications (3), and finally resources from which the students must extrapolate protocols (4 and 5). Ultimately, students are not provided with protocols, but instead find protocols on their own (last). The red color on the left that decreases from top to bottom represents the amount of student dependence on the written instructions from the professor, and the blue color on the right that increases from top to bottom represents the amount of student independence at each stage of the weaning.

Source: J. Microbiol. Biol. Educ. April 2017 vol. 18 no. 1 doi:10.1128/jmbe.v18i1.1230
Download as Powerpoint
Image of FIGURE 2

Click to view

FIGURE 2

Specific application of the weaning philosophy and approach. The name of each specific module (left) is listed with its accompanying experiments (middle) and the type of resources that are provided for those experiments (right). The color and intensity of the background fields of the modules represent the amount of professor dependence (red) or student independence (blue) in each module (see Fig. 1 ). Experiments listed in green print are procedures that the students have learned in previous modules. The other color print (black or white) differs only for ease of reading.

Source: J. Microbiol. Biol. Educ. April 2017 vol. 18 no. 1 doi:10.1128/jmbe.v18i1.1230
Download as Powerpoint

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Please check the format of the address you have entered.
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error