Kimberly D. Tanner

Making Biology Learning Relevant to Students: Integrating People, History, and Context into College Biology Teaching

Biology is front page news, so it is important that we teach students to make connections between what they learn in the classroom and what they see in everyday life. As biology researchers, we recognize the negative implications of doing science in a vacuum as we are increasingly asked to communicate effectively with local and national legislators. As biology instructors, however, we may choose to teach biology devoid of social context, believing that students can make these connections on their own. But students model their instructors’ behaviors, and follow their lead. If we integrate social issues into the biology curriculum, we model social responsibility for biology majors, and we demonstrate the need for biological literacy for nonmajors. With an ever expanding biology curriculum, some instructors may wonder how they will find space to bring in social issues, and what biological content may be omitted in the process. By strategically embedding social context into those topics that are traditionally reviewed in multiple biology courses we sacrifice little time and content, and allow students to reflect on that social context more than once. By extending the Biological Concepts Framework (Khodar et al., 2004) to issues of social relevance, we may improve student learning retention, since each concept has multiple points of entry, and therefore, multiple points of interest that can serve as avenues for the retrieval of information. Using real-world problems to thread a number of biological concepts together encourages students to move away from seeing biology as a collection of disparate concepts, subject areas, or chapters from textbooks that are far removed from society. This cues them to make connections to biology during their study of nonbiological disciplines. This approach leads to reinforcement of the social connection and to the development of a habit of mind that students can carry forward as they progress through a 4-yr curriculum and beyond. Recent reports on science education reform promote this pedagogical approach because it prepares students to grapple with the interdisciplinary nature of twenty-first century problems (National Research Council [NRC], 2005). Integrative learning is listed as one of four essential learning outcomes in the “Learning for the New Global Century report.” The “Integrative Learning Project,” initiated by the American Association of Colleges and Universities (AACU 2007) and the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, provides practical resources for achieving these goals (AACU Ausubel et al., 1978; Lattuca et al., 2004). With this in mind, this feature first demonstrates the important connection between biology and social issues, and then examines how the history of biology can be used to infuse relevance into the biology curriculum.

Talking to Learn: Why Biology Students Should Be Talking in Classrooms and How to Make It Happen

Student Talk is key to student learning. In addition, the teaching strategies needed to promote student talk are highly accessible to all biology instructors and are applicable to classroom settings of any size. Whether your teaching philosophy is more aligned with a traditional lecture approach or a more active-learning approach, Student Talk is easily integrated into the classroom in as little as 5 min. Together, these ideas suggest that with relatively minimal effort, instructors can promote Student Talk as a regular and expected part of undergraduate biology learning and have a significant impact on student learning.

Science Faculty with Education Specialties

Career dynamics for science faculty with interests in education point the way for developing this nascent career specialty.

Investigation of Science Faculty with Education Specialties within the Largest University System in the United States

Efforts to improve science education include university science departments hiring Science Faculty with Education Specialties (SFES), scientists who take on specialized roles in science education within their discipline. Although these positions have existed for decades and may be growing more common, few reports have investigated the SFES approach to improving science education. We present comprehensive data on the SFES in the California State University (CSU) system, the largest university system in the United States. We found that CSU SFES were engaged in three key arenas including K–12 science education, undergraduate science education, and discipline-based science education research. As such, CSU SFES appeared to be well-positioned to have an impact on science education from within science departments. However, there appeared to be a lack of clarity and agreement about the purpose of these SFES positions. In addition, formal training in science education among CSU SFES was limited. Although over 75% of CSU SFES were fulfilled by their teaching, scholarship, and service, our results revealed that almost 40% of CSU SFES were seriously considering leaving their positions. Our data suggest that science departments would likely benefit from explicit discussions about the role of SFES and strategies for supporting their professional activities.

Relations between Intuitive Biological Thinking and Biological Misconceptions in Biology Majors and Nonmajors

The authors present evidence that seemingly unrelated biological misconceptions may share common conceptual origins arising from underlying systems of intuitive biological reasoning, or “cognitive construals.” The findings presented raise the intriguing possibility that university-level biology education may reify construal-based thinking and related misconceptions.

Widespread distribution and unexpected variation among science faculty with education specialties (SFES) across the United States

College and university science departments are increasingly taking an active role in improving science education. Perhaps as a result, a new type of specialized science faculty position within science departments is emerging—referred to here as science faculty with education specialties (SFES)—where individual scientists focus their professional efforts on strengthening undergraduate science education, improving kindergarten-through-12th grade science education, and conducting discipline-based education research. Numerous assertions, assumptions, and questions about SFES exist, yet no national studies have been published. Here, we present findings from a large-scale study of US SFES, who are widespread and increasing in numbers. Contrary to many assumptions, SFES were indeed found across the nation, across science disciplines, and, most notably, across primarily undergraduate, master of science-granting, and PhD-granting institutions. Data also reveal unexpected variations among SFES by institution type. Among respondents, SFES at master of science-granting institutions were almost twice as likely to have formal training in science education compared with other SFES. In addition, SFES at PhD-granting institutions were much more likely to have obtained science education funding. Surprisingly, formal training in science education provided no advantage in obtaining science education funding. Our findings show that the SFES phenomenon is likely more complex and diverse than anticipated, with differences being more evident across institution types than across science disciplines. These findings raise questions about the origins of differences among SFES and are useful to science departments interested in hiring SFES, scientific trainees preparing for SFES careers, and agencies awarding science education funding.

Development of the biology card sorting task to measure conceptual expertise in biology.

The authors present the development of a novel assessment tool, the Biology Card Sorting Task, designed to probe how individuals organize their conceptual knowledge of biology. Results suggest that the task is robust in distinguishing populations of biology experts and novices and represents a useful tool for probing emerging biology conceptual expertise.

Order Matters: Using the 5E Model to Align Teaching with How People Learn

“I have to teach someone to make a peanut butter and jelly sandwich. How am I supposed to do that? What should I start with? How can this be so hard?” I have found that teaching anything to another person is rife with far more decisions and dilemmas than I could have ever imagined at first. Years ago, I had a college roommate who wanted to participate in a summer teaching program. For her interview, she had to develop a lesson plan to teach someone else how to make a peanut butter and jelly sandwich. Have you ever thought about teaching someone else how to make a peanut butter and jelly sandwich? She had asked for my input, and once we started to really consider the possibilities, our minds reeled. How would you start? What would you do first? Next? After that? Who was the learner anyway? And had they made a sandwich before? Were they allergic to peanuts? How old were they? Should we let them have a knife? Should we show them how first? Talk them through it? Let them have a go at it on their own? Should we first teach them the names of all the tools and things we were going to use? Should we ask them why they needed to learn how to make a peanut butter and jelly sandwich in the first place? What were the critical issues in teaching someone how to make a peanut butter and jelly sandwich? Much like in the “PBJ Dilemma” as we came to call it, there are many decisions to be made in designing effective learning experiences in undergraduate biology classes—and instructors are making these decisions constantly. It can seem overwhelming, yet the research literatures from cognitive science, psychology, and science education about how people learn suggest guidelines about constructing effective learning experiences (National Research Council [NRC], 1999 ). Much like the PBJ Dilemma, the order in which we decide to do things with students when we teach is critical, yet the order of things happening in a class session often goes undiscussed and unexamined. At first glance, the most pressing teaching dilemmas in our biology classrooms—student motivation, student retention of information, student understanding of difficult concepts—may seem unrelated to the order in which things are happening; however, what we do first, second, third, and so on can have many ramifications. For many instructors who have primarily learned from and used a lecture-based teaching approach, considerations of order have been primarily about the order of ideas. With the increasing use of active-learning strategies, class sessions are moving from having a single component—a lecture—to having many components over the course of even 50 minutes (e.g., a video clip, a pair discussion on a biology-based problem, a clicker question, a mini-lecture, and a final index card reflection). So, what is the optimal order for sequencing these elements to maximize student learning of biology?

Investigative Cases and Student Outcomes in an Upper-Division Cell and Molecular Biology Laboratory Course at a Minority-serving Institution

Active-learning strategies are increasingly being integrated into college-level science courses to make material more accessible to all students and to improve learning outcomes. One active-learning pedagogy, case-based learning (CBL), was developed as a way to both enhance engagement in the material and to accommodate diverse learning styles. Yet, adoption of CBL approaches in undergraduate biology courses has been piecemeal, in part because of the perceived investment of time required. Furthermore, few CBL lesson plans have been developed specifically for upper-division laboratory courses. Here, we describe four cases that we developed and implemented for a senior cell and molecular biology laboratory course at San Francisco State University, a minority-serving institution. To evaluate the effectiveness of these modules, we used both written and verbal assessments to gauge learning outcomes and attitudinal responses of students over two semesters. Students responded positively to the new approach and seemed to meet the learning goals for the course. Most said they would take a course using CBL again. These case modules are readily adaptable to a variety of classroom settings.

Assessing the Life Science Knowledge of Students and Teachers Represented by the K–8 National Science Standards

We present an analysis of the relationship between student and teacher mastery of National Research Councils K8 life sciences content standards.