Jennifer Loertscher

Lecture-free biochemistry: A Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Approach.

Biochemistry courses at Seattle University have been taught exclusively using process oriented guided inquiry learning (POGIL) without any traditional lecture component since 1997. In these courses, students participate in a structured learning environment, which includes a preparatory assignment, an in‐class activity, and a follow‐up skill exercise. Instructor‐designed learning activities provide the content of the course while the cooperative learning structure provides the content‐free procedures that promote development of critical process skills needed for learning. This format enables students to initially explore a topic independently, work together in groups to construct and refine knowledge, and eventually develop deep understanding of the essential concepts. These stages of exploration and concept development form the foundation for application to high level biochemical problems. At the end of this course, most students report feeling confident in their knowledge of biochemistry and report substantial gains in independence, critical thinking, and respect for others.

Learning transferable skills in large lecture halls: Implementing a POGIL approach in biochemistry

As research‐based, active learning approaches become more common in biochemistry classrooms, the large lecture course remains the most challenging to transform. Here, we provide a case study demonstrating how process oriented guided inquiry learning (POGIL) can be implemented in a large class taught in a traditional lecture hall. Course structure and multiple strategies to support student learning and encourage engagement are described in detail. Therefore, this case study could act as a model for others wishing to transform their own courses from lecture to a more student‐centered format. Student feedback about the course format was overwhelmingly positive and preliminary assessment data demonstrated student learning gains in several important areas. BIOCHEMISTRY AND MOLECULAR BIOLOGY EDUCATION, 2012

Identification of Threshold Concepts for Biochemistry

This study describes an iterative process involving faculty and students to identify potential threshold concepts for biochemistry.

Uncovering students' incorrect ideas about foundational concepts for biochemistry

This paper presents preliminary data on how an assessment instrument with a unique structure can be used to identify common incorrect ideas from prior coursework at the beginning of a biochemistry course, and to determine whether these ideas have changed by the end of the course. The twenty-one multiple-choice items address seven different concepts, with a parallel structure for distractors across each set of items to capture consistent incorrect responses. For the current study, the instrument was administered as a pre-test and post-test in majors level biochemistry courses, and the results from two different groups are presented. These results indicated that students performed better on the post-test, resulting in positive mean gain scores for each concept. The structure of the instrument allows data analysis that helped uncover persistent incorrect ideas for some of the concepts, including bond energy and protein alpha helix structure, even after a semester of instruction in biochemistry. The persistent incorrect idea for the protein alpha helix structure uncovered by this assessment has not been reported before in the literature. These results confirm the need to use a robust diagnostic instrument to assess students’ understanding of basic concepts at the beginning of the semester, but also stress the need to assess students near the end of the course to gain insight on the effectiveness of instruction. Since each group of students is different, biochemistry instructors are encouraged to use the instrument to identify problems with their own students’ incoming ideas rather than rely on published results to inform instruction. In addition to providing assistance for instructors of biochemistry in planning targeted instructional interventions, we anticipate that data collected from this instrument can also be used to identify potential modifications for prerequisite courses.

Endoplasmic Reticulum-Associated Degradation Is Required for Cold Adaptation and Regulation of Sterol Biosynthesis in the Yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae

ABSTRACT Endoplasmic reticulum-associated degradation (ERAD) mediates the turnover of short-lived and misfolded proteins in the ER membrane or lumen. In spite of its important role, only subtle growth phenotypes have been associated with defects in ERAD. We have discovered that the ERAD proteins Ubc7 (Qri8), Cue1, and Doa10 (Ssm4) are required for growth of yeast that express high levels of the sterol biosynthetic enzyme, 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase (HMGR). Interestingly, the observed growth defect was exacerbated at low temperatures, producing an HMGR-dependent cold sensitivity. Yeast strains lacking UBC7, CUE1, or DOA10 also assembled aberrant karmellae (ordered arrays of membranes surrounding the nucleus that assemble when HMGR is expressed at high levels). However, rather than reflecting the accumulation of abnormal karmellae, the cold sensitivity of these ERAD mutants was due to increased HMGR catalytic activity. Mutations that compromise proteasomal function also resulted in cold-sensitive growth of yeast with elevated HMGR, suggesting that improper degradation of ERAD targets might be responsible for the observed cold-sensitive phenotype. However, the essential ERAD targets were not the yeast HMGR enzymes themselves. The sterol metabolite profile of ubc7Δ cells was altered relative to that of wild-type cells. Since sterol levels are known to regulate membrane fluidity, the viability of ERAD mutants expressing normal levels of HMGR was examined at low temperatures. Cells lacking UBC7, CUE1, or DOA10 were cold sensitive, suggesting that these ERAD proteins have a role in cold adaptation, perhaps through effects on sterol biosynthesis.

Probing and improving student's understanding of protein α‐helix structure using targeted assessment and classroom interventions in collaboration with a faculty community of practice

The increasing availability of concept inventories and other assessment tools in the molecular life sciences provides instructors with myriad avenues to probe student understanding. For example, although molecular visualization is central to the study of biochemistry, a growing body of evidence suggests that students have substantial limitations in their ability to recognize and interpret basic features of biological macromolecules. In this study, a pre/posttest administered to students at diverse institutions nationwide revealed a robust incorrect idea about the location of the amino acid side chains in the protein α‐helix structure. Because this incorrect idea was present even after a semester of biochemistry instruction at a range of institutions, an intervention was necessary. A community of expert biochemistry instructors collaborated to design two active learning classroom activities that systematically examine α‐helix structure and function. Several participating faculty used one or both of the activities in their classrooms and some improvement of student understanding of this concept was observed. This study provides a model of how a community of instructors can work together using assessment data to inform targeted changes in instruction with the goal of improving student understanding of fundamental concepts.

Sustaining the development and implementation of student‐centered teaching nationally: The importance of a community of practice

Although the idea of using a workshop to educate potential users about a set of materials or techniques is not new, the workshops described here go beyond simple dissemination and create ongoing communities of practice that support widespread and sustained improvement in the biochemistry classroom. The degree to which pedagogical innovations improve student learning on a national level depends on how broadly they are disseminated and how they are implemented and sustained. Workshops can be effective in disseminating ideas and techniques, but they often fail to sustain implementation. This paper describes Core Collaborators Workshops (CCWs) that were specifically designed for biochemistry faculty to improve the quality of active learning materials, support faculty in transforming their classrooms, and disseminate these efforts nationally. This CCW model proved very effective to date as shown by the fact that, 8 months after the last CCW, all workshop participants reported using at least some of the instructional materials discussed during the workshop. In addition, participants remarked that the superior community building and direct mentoring available through the CCWs greatly increased their confidence in implementing this new curricular approach and has made them more likely to act as leaders themselves. BIOCHEMISTRY AND MOLECULAR BIOLOGY EDUCATION Vol. 39, No. 6, pp. 405–411, 2011

Cooperative Learning for Faculty: Building Communities of Practice.

As a science teaching community, we are currently in the midst of a major shift from traditional, lecture-based teaching approaches to student-centered approaches that emphasize inquiry, cooperative learning, and development of a broad range of transferrable skills [1]. These changes, driven largely by a growing body of research on how people learn and by influential reports such as Vision and Change [2], demand substantial curricular reform [3, 4]. However, science faculty members rarely receive formal training on pedagogical theory and practices and are almost never exposed to theories of institutional change, which come largely from business and economics. Therefore, as faculty commit to making changes in their classrooms and degree programs, we may find ourselves in the unfamiliar position of feeling more like students than experts. One way to support the collective learning process, that will be necessary to make and sustain widespread changes in curriculum, is through formation of communities of practice. The purpose of this commentary is to briefly introduce the idea of communities of practice to the biochemistry education community and to encourage those who are interested to learn more by reading the excellent book on the topic by Etienne Wenger and by exploring specific examples given in refs. 6–10. Those interested in starting and/or becoming involved in communities of practice related to biochemistry education will find abundant resources in these references and are welcome to contact the author of this commentary for tips on how to become involved (loertscher@seattleu.edu). Communities of practice, described by Wenger [5], are groups of people who work together based on a common interest or passion and are based on the idea that people, learn, grow, and develop through social practice. Three key features that define a community of practice are 1) engaging in activities of mutual interest, 2) building relationships through shared activity, and 3) creating common resources [5]. As the biochemistry and molecular biology community seeks to make and sustain changes in teaching and curriculum, conscious formation of communities of practice will become increasingly important. The following paragraphs provide an exploration of the key features of communities of practice as well as some examples of communities of practice designed to support teaching innovations.

Using assessment to improve learning in the biochemistry classroom.

In recent years, major drivers of undergraduate science education reform including the National Science Foundation (NSF) and the Howard Hughes Medical Institute (HHMI) have called on college and university instructors to take a more scientific approach to their teaching. Scientific teaching, eloquently described by Handelsman, Miller, and Pfund in their book of the same title, suggests that scientists approach their classrooms as they would their experiments, focusing on outcomes and basing conclusions and subsequent actions on evidence [1]. Although many biochemistry instructors are gaining confidence in using small-scale formative assessment projects, few have the expertise to conduct more formalized, quantitative studies. And yet this type of assessment project, often associated with the growing field of chemical education research [2], can be very helpful in gaining greater understanding of student learning and in communicating to peers about new teaching practices and their effect on student learning. In 2007, a colleague and I were fortunate to obtain NSF funding for a project to improve and disseminate process-oriented guided inquiry learning (POGIL) materials for the biochemistry classroom [3–5]. To fulfill assessment expectations we have worked closely with chemical education researchers involved in the POGIL project [6, 7]. Specifically we have developed an assessment instrument to identify incorrect ideas students bring from general chemistry and biology to biochemistry courses and to measure changes in student understanding after completing biochemistry. After two years of designing, piloting with over 1000 students, and revising the instrument, it is finally generating valid and reliable results. The current instrument is a 21-question multiple choice test focusing on major concepts identified by experts as being problematic for students in general chemistry and general biology. The concepts relate to bond energy, spontaneity of processes, pKa, intermolecular forces, peptide primary and secondary structure, and the consequence of mutations on protein function. Fifteen biochemistry instructors at a variety of institutions including two large research universities have piloted the instrument as a pretest. Responses from colleagues who have viewed their student performance on the test have been dramatic. While most faculty members suspected that students would need to review some concepts from previous courses upon entering biochemistry, the widespread poor performance on relatively simple questions was surprising. However, after some initial disappointment, our colleagues used the insights gained from test results to make targeted changes to their biochemistry courses. Some expressed feeling empowered to make such changes because they had evidence that students needed additional support in specific concept areas. Over the next year, faculty members participating in the project are looking forward to using pre/post data to determine whether their efforts to improve their biochemistry courses are leading to correct understanding of basic ideas and to good understanding of biochemical concepts. To assess student understanding of important biochemical concepts, we are currently in the process of collecting and analyzing responses to test questions that participating faculty have agreed to embed on exams given at the end of their courses. These questions, which require a short written answer, are designed to assess students’ ability to transfer their understanding of a key biochemical concept, enzyme kinetics, to a new setting. Although the process of creating these instruments has been challenging, working with colleagues in biochemistry and chemical education research has been informative and rewarding. As biochemists with no formal training in education research, my biochemistry colleagues and I have learned much about instrument design and analysis. My chemical education research colleagues found it helpful to receive real time feedback from biochemistry instructors who were in the classroom with students. Even more importantly, this fruitful collaboration with chemical educator researchers has established new professional relationships and has expanded possibilities for projects in the future. ‡ To whom correspondence should be addressed. 901 12th Ave, Seattle, WA 98122 E-mail: loertscher@seattleu.edu.

For Want of a Better Word: Unlocking Threshold Concepts in Natural Sciences with a Key from the Humanities?.

ABSTRACT The process of identifying threshold concepts invites experts to reflect on their discipline in a new way with the ultimate goal of improving learning and teaching. During a workshop to identify threshold concepts in biochemistry, we asked a group of natural scientists to explore ‘signification,’ a threshold concept from the humanities, as a mechanism to push them out of their comfort zones and recall how it feels to experience learning from a student’s perspective. In addition to accomplishing this goal, we subsequently realized that signification could also help us uncover and remedy ways in which use of scientific terminology impedes learning in biochemistry. Using the results of a survey of university teachers that aimed at refining a list of possible threshold concepts, we present three scenarios to illustrate the challenges that teachers and students encounter when attempting to cement a label (the signifier) and a concept (the signified) into a coherent sign. Based on these findings, we propose that teachers can better explore threshold concepts if they carefully consider the role terminology plays in learning and teaching. Thus we describe the ‘terminological canyon’ through which university teachers must journey in order to produce effective learning and teaching activities related to the threshold concepts. While the work described here pertains to biochemistry, we believe the process and findings can be generalized to a broad range of disciplines.