1887

Sharing Notes Is Encouraged: Annotating and Cocreating with Hypothes.is and Google Docs

    Authors: Carlos C. Goller1,*, Micah Vandegrift2, Will Cross2, Davida S. Smyth3
    VIEW AFFILIATIONS HIDE AFFILIATIONS
    Affiliations: 1: Department of Biological Sciences, Biotechnology Program (BIT), North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695; 2: NC State University Libraries, Raleigh, NC 27695; 3: Eugene Lang College of Liberal Arts at The New School, New York City, NY 10011
    AUTHOR AND ARTICLE INFORMATION AUTHOR AND ARTICLE INFORMATION
    • Received 12 April 2020 Accepted 28 November 2020 Published 29 January 2021
    • ©2021 Author(s). Published by the American Society for Microbiology
    • [open-access] This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ and https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/legalcode), which grants the public the nonexclusive right to copy, distribute, or display the published work.

    • Supplemental materials available at http://asmscience.org/jmbe
    • *Corresponding author. Mailing address: 6104 Jordan Hall, Campus Box 7512, North Carolina State University Biotechnology Program, 2800 Faucette Drive, Raleigh NC 27695. Phone: 919-513-4135. E-mail: [email protected].
    Source: J. Microbiol. Biol. Educ. January 2021 vol. 22 no. 1 doi:10.1128/jmbe.v22i1.2135
MyBook is a cheap paperback edition of the original book and will be sold at uniform, low price.
  • HTML
    33.01 Kb
  • XML
    32.39 Kb
  • PDF
    937.51 Kb

    Abstract:

    Effectively analyzing literature can be challenging for those unfamiliar with studies from rapidly evolving research fields. Previous studies have shown that incorporating primary literature promotes scientific literacy and critical thinking skills. We’ve used collaborative note-taking and annotation of peer-reviewed articles to increase student engagement with course content and primary literature. Participants annotate articles using the web-annotation tool Hypothes.is and have access to comments from their peers. Groups are then assigned to summarize the annotations and findings, posting a synthesis for the course’s Hypothes.is group. In parallel, students contribute to common notes. The instructor generates a weekly video discussing the student notes. The goal of these activities is to foster an environment of open annotation and co-creation of knowledge to aid in studying for deeper learning. Compiled notes can be used to create an open educational resource (OER). The OER provides an entry point for future students and the public. Based on the evaluation of annotations, notes, and assessments, we conclude that these activities encourage student engagement and achievement of learning outcomes while raising awareness of the importance of open and collaborative practices.

References & Citations

1. Rawlings JS 2019 Primary literature in the undergraduate immunology curriculum: strategies, challenges, and opportunities Front Immunol 10 1857 10.3389/fimmu.2019.01857 31440246 6693355 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2019.01857
2. Nelms AA, Segura-Totten M 2019 Expert–novice comparison reveals pedagogical implications for students’ analysis of primary literature CBE Life Sci Educ 18 ar56. 10.1187/cbe.18-05-0077 http://dx.doi.org/10.1187/cbe.18-05-0077
3. Abdullah C, Parris J, Lie R, Guzdar A, Tour E 2015 Critical analysis of primary literature in a master’s-level class: effects on self-efficacy and science-process skills CBE Life Sci Educ 14 ar34. 10.1187/cbe.14-10-0180 http://dx.doi.org/10.1187/cbe.14-10-0180
4. Liao MK 2017 A simple activity to enhance the learning experience of reading primary literature J Microbiol Biol Educ 18 10.1128/jmbe.v18i1.1211 28512516 5410757 http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/jmbe.v18i1.1211
5. Hoskins SG, Lopatto D, Stevens LM 2011 The C.R.E.A.T.E. approach to primary literature shifts undergraduates’ self-assessed ability to read and analyze journal articles, attitudes about science, and epistemological beliefs CBE Life Sci Educ 10 368 378 10.1187/cbe.11-03-0027 22135371 3228655 http://dx.doi.org/10.1187/cbe.11-03-0027
6. Gottesman AJ, Hoskins SG 2013 CREATE cornerstone: introduction to scientific thinking, a new course for stem-interested freshmen demystifies scientific thinking through analysis of scientific literature CBE Life Sci Educ 12 59 72 10.1187/cbe.12-11-0201 23463229 3587857 http://dx.doi.org/10.1187/cbe.12-11-0201
7. Carmichael JS, Allison LA 2019 Using “research boxes” to enhance understanding of primary literature and the process of science J Microbiol Biol Educ 20 2 10.1128/jmbe.v20i2.1743 6656526 http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/jmbe.v20i2.1743
8. Round JE, Campbell AM 2013 Figure facts: encouraging undergraduates to take a data-centered approach to reading primary literature CBE Life Sci Educ 12 39 46 10.1187/cbe.11-07-0057 23463227 3587854 http://dx.doi.org/10.1187/cbe.11-07-0057
9. Lo SM, Luu TB, Tran J 2020 A modified CREATE intervention improves student cognitive and affective outcomes in an upper-division genetics course J Microbiol Biol Educ 21 1 10.1128/jmbe.v21i1.1881 32431773 7198224 http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/jmbe.v21i1.1881
10. Morehead K, Dunlosky J, Rawson KA, Blasiman R, Hollis RB 2019 Note-taking habits of 21st-century college students: implications for student learning, memory, and achievement Memory 27 807 819 10.1080/09658211.2019.1569694 30747570 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09658211.2019.1569694
11. Kennedy M 2016 Open annotation and close reading the Victorian text: using hypothes.is with students J Vic Cult 21 550 558 10.1080/13555502.2016.1233905 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13555502.2016.1233905
12. Shrout AH 2016 Hypothes.is J Am Hist 103 870 871 10.1093/jahist/jaw495 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jahist/jaw495
13. Perkel JM 2015 Annotating the scholarly web Nat News 528 153 10.1038/528153a http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/528153a
14. Kalir JH, Dean J 2018 Web annotation as conversation and interruption Media Pract Educ 19 18 29 10.1080/14682753.2017.1362168 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14682753.2017.1362168
15. Kararo M, McCartney M 2019 Annotated primary scientific literature: a pedagogical tool for undergraduate courses PLOS Biol 17 e3000103 10.1371/journal.pbio.3000103 30625129 6342315 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.3000103
16. Miller K, Zyto S, Karger D, Yoo J, Mazur E 2016 Analysis of student engagement in an online annotation system in the context of a flipped introductory physics class Phys Rev Phys Educ Res 12 020143 10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.12.020143 http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.12.020143
17. Sahota M, Leung B, Dowdell S, Velan GM 2016 Learning pathology using collaborative vs. individual annotation of whole slide images: a mixed methods trial BMC Med Educ 16 311 10.1186/s12909-016-0831-x 27955651 5154086 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-016-0831-x
18. Yaeger J, Wolfe T 2018 Creating the ripple effect: applying student-generated OER to increase engagement in distance education and enhance the OER community Digital Universities 1/2
19. Goller CC, Ott LE 2020 Evolution of an 8-week upper-division metagenomics course: diagramming a learning path from observational to quantitative microbiome analysis Biochem Mol Biol Educ 48 391 403 10.1002/bmb.21349 32294307 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/bmb.21349
20. Gordy CL, Goller CC Using metabolic engineering to connect molecular biology techniques to societal challenges Front Microbiol 2020 10.3389/fmicb.2020.577004 33304328 7701299 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2020.577004

Supplemental Material

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journal/jmbe/10.1128/jmbe.v22i1.2135
2021-01-29
2021-05-17

Abstract:

Effectively analyzing literature can be challenging for those unfamiliar with studies from rapidly evolving research fields. Previous studies have shown that incorporating primary literature promotes scientific literacy and critical thinking skills. We’ve used collaborative note-taking and annotation of peer-reviewed articles to increase student engagement with course content and primary literature. Participants annotate articles using the web-annotation tool Hypothes.is and have access to comments from their peers. Groups are then assigned to summarize the annotations and findings, posting a synthesis for the course’s Hypothes.is group. In parallel, students contribute to common notes. The instructor generates a weekly video discussing the student notes. The goal of these activities is to foster an environment of open annotation and co-creation of knowledge to aid in studying for deeper learning. Compiled notes can be used to create an open educational resource (OER). The OER provides an entry point for future students and the public. Based on the evaluation of annotations, notes, and assessments, we conclude that these activities encourage student engagement and achievement of learning outcomes while raising awareness of the importance of open and collaborative practices.

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

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/jmbe/22/1/jmbe-22-2.html?itemId=/content/journal/jmbe/10.1128/jmbe.v22i1.2135&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Figures

Image of FIGURE 1

Click to view

FIGURE 1

“Sharing Notes is Encouraged” workflow. Students annotate and cocreate notes to produce an OER for studying and future course participants. Students use Hypothes.is to annotate primary literature as homework assignments, following set guidelines (for details see Appendix 1 ), and groups are tasked with creating shared summaries for the class to view within a Hypothes.is group. Students contribute to shared notes both during and outside of the class session. The instructor then uses the notes to produce weekly recaps to provide feedback and encouragement. Student contributions are then compiled to create a final OER, containing all notes and annotations generated over the course of the semester in a publicly viewable dynamic resource (for a sample OER, go to go.ncsu.edu/bitmetagenomics and click on “Meta Book”). PB, Pressbooks.

Source: J. Microbiol. Biol. Educ. January 2021 vol. 22 no. 1 doi:10.1128/jmbe.v22i1.2135
Download as Powerpoint
Image of FIGURE 2

Click to view

FIGURE 2

Students annotated assigned papers frequently and began using descriptive “tags.” (A) Students used the Hypothes.is tool to annotate reading assignments and tag keywords or phrases. Some students responded to other comments and included links and other resources. (B) All students’ ( = 15) annotated readings.

Source: J. Microbiol. Biol. Educ. January 2021 vol. 22 no. 1 doi:10.1128/jmbe.v22i1.2135
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