Heather B. Miller

Student Learning Outcomes and Attitudes When Biotechnology Lab Partners Are of Different Academic Levels

The North Carolina State University Biotechnology Program offers laboratory-intensive courses to both undergraduate and graduate students. In “Manipulation and Expression of Recombinant DNA,” students are separated into undergraduate and graduate sections for the laboratory, but not the lecture, component. Evidence has shown that students prefer pairing with someone of the same academic level. However, retention of main ideas in peer learning environments has been shown to be greater when partners have dissimilar abilities. Therefore, we tested the hypothesis that there will be enhanced student learning when lab partners are of different academic levels. We found that learning outcomes were met by both levels of student, regardless of pairing. Average undergraduate grades on every assessment method increased when undergraduates were paired with graduate students. Many of the average graduate student grades also increased modestly when graduate students were paired with undergraduates. Attitudes toward working with partners dramatically shifted toward favoring working with students of different academic levels. This work suggests that offering dual-level courses in which different-level partnerships are created does not inhibit learning by students of different academic levels. This format is useful for institutions that wish to offer “boutique” courses in which student enrollment may be low, but specialized equipment and faculty expertise are needed.

A contemporary, laboratory-intensive course on messenger RNA transcription and processing

Messenger ribonucleic acid (mRNA) plays a pivotal role in the central dogma of molecular biology. Importantly, molecular events occurring during and after mRNA synthesis have the potential to create multiple proteins from one gene, leading to some of the remarkable protein diversity that genomes hold. The North Carolina State University Biotechnology Program developed and implemented a new, laboratory‐intensive course to provide students with a contemporary view of mRNA entitled “mRNA: Transcription and Processing.” This course, offered at both the undergraduate and graduate levels, aimed to introduce students to the many functions of RNA, with an emphasis on mRNA. In addition to fundamental aspects of these processes, students were exposed to cutting‐edge techniques used to analyze mRNA in both lecture and laboratory components. We evaluated this course over two semesters and found that learning outcomes were met by both undergraduate and graduate students, based on assessments such as laboratory reports, pre‐lab assignments, a final exam, and successful results in the laboratory. We also examined student perceptions through anonymous surveys, where students reported gains in confidence in both conceptual knowledge and technical skill after completing this course.

Assessment of a novel group-centered testing schema in an upper-level undergraduate molecular biotechnology course

Providing students with assignments that focus on critical thinking is an important part of their scientific and intellectual development. However, as class sizes increase, so does the grading burden, prohibiting many faculty from incorporating critical thinking assignments in the classroom. In an effort to continue to provide our students with meaningful critical thinking exercises, we implemented a novel group‐centered, problem‐based testing scheme. We wanted to assess how performing critical thinking problem sets as group work compares to performing the sets as individual work, in terms of student attitudes and learning outcomes. During two semesters of our recombinant DNA course, students had the same lecture material and similar assessments. In the Fall semester, student learning was assessed by two collaborative take‐home exams, followed immediately by individual, closed‐book in‐class exams on the same content, as well as a final cumulative exam. Student teams on the take‐home exams were instructor‐assigned, and each team turned in one collaborative exam. In the Spring semester, the control group of students were required to turn in their own individual take‐home exams, followed by the in‐class exams and final cumulative exam. For the majority of students, learning outcomes were met, regardless of whether they worked in teams. In addition, collaborative learning was favorably received by students and grading was reduced for instructors. These data suggest that group‐centered, problem‐based learning is a useful model for achievement of student learning outcomes in courses where it would be infeasible to provide feedback on individual critical thinking assignments due to grading volume.

Lab Session 11 – Expression of Fusion Protein from Positive Clones, SDS-PAGE and Western Blot: Part 1

Abstract Today you will stain your membrane with Ponceau Red to confirm the transfer of your proteins to the nitrocellulose and complete the western blot that was started in the last laboratory session.