Robert B. Hermanson II
Instructor
Inegrative Physiology
University of Colorado at Boulder
354 UCB
Boulder, CO 80309-0354
303-492-8078
Robert.Hermanson@Colorado.EDU
What is the central question, issue, or problem you plan to explore in your proposed work?
Research has demonstrated the importance of student response systems (SRS), such as iClickers, in improving learning in large lecture sections. I am not aware of any studies that explore iClicker use in the laboratory setting. Can iClickers improve student learning in the lab? In this study, I want to examine the proposition that iClickers can help to bridge the gap between content and procedure, improving students’ ability to attain higher levels of cognition.
Our Human Physiology Lab curriculum is comprised of inquiry-based hypothetico-deductive experimentation and traditional demonstration of fundamental physiological mechanisms of living systems. I find that students frequently have trouble integrating the lecture content into the experimental protocol and ultimately fail to predict outcomes and demonstrate understanding of background material when following a prescribed procedure. Therefore, I seek a solution that will increase the students’ ability to synthesize the concepts and apply their knowledge in the lab exercises.
In essence, our teaching labs take a hybrid approach, as they consist of lecture-style presentations followed by hands-on activities for which students apply what they have learned in the preceding presentations. Each lab begins with a prepared 30- to 60-minute PowerPoint presentation that outlines the physiological background and mechanisms to be addressed in that lab. Students then follow a sequenced, experimental protocol, during which they often seem to lose sight of the physiological rationale.
Knowing that the use of student response systems (SRS) has shown to be very effective in transforming large-lecture, passive-learning environments into more active-learning, interactive environments, I want to know whether an SRS technology (iClickers) can help bridge the gap between presented material and lab protocol. I would like to study the effectiveness of such tools in a laboratory setting, using the strategy of promoting interaction during the introductory prep lectures and then assessing the students’ higher-order learning, using assessment based on Bloom’s taxonomy of cognitive domains.
Why is your central question, issue, or problem important, to you and to others who might benefit from or build on your findings?
SRS have been shown to be very effective in improving learning outcomes in large lecture sessions. Their effectiveness in the lab setting is relatively not studied.
How do you plan to conduct your investigation? What sources of evidence do you plan to examine? What methods might you employ to gather and make sense of this evidence?
In the upcoming Spring Semester, I will coordinate 16 sections of Human Physiology Labs. Although graduate teaching assistants (TAs) will lead these classes, I will create and provide PowerPoint presentations that will offer uniformity and consistency between TAs and sections.
This arrangement offers a unique opportunity to study the effectiveness of SRS by inserting iClicker-response questions into the presentations given to exactly half of the sections. Each week, eight of the 16 lab sections will be randomly chosen to be presented with a PowerPoint presentation that have iClicker questions nested within. Assessment will be based on standardized weekly quiz scores, testing concepts that are not directly addressed in the iClicker questions, and will be statistically analyzed.
My PTLC Coach, Francoise Benay, an IPHY affiliate from the Science Education Initiative (SEI), will assist in the design and implementation of these iClicker questions. Franny has been working for the past three years to incorporate iClicker technology into the Human Anatomy and Human Physiology lecture courses and is well versed in the pedagogy of the tool.
How might you make your work available to others in ways that facilitate scholarly critique and review, and that contribute to thought and practice beyond the local?
I plan to present the findings to the Science Education Initiative and hope to submit the research to peer-reviewed educational journals such as Cell Biology Education or the Journal of Science Education and Technology.
References
Barber, M., and Njus, D. (2007). Clicker Evolution: seeking intelligent design. CBE Life Sci. Educ. 6, 1-8.
Beatty, I.D., Gerace, W.J., Leonard, W.J., and Dufresne, R.J. (2006). Designing effective questions for classroom response system teaching. Am. J. Phys. 74(1), 31-39.
Bloom, B.S., Krathwohl, D.R. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals, by a committee of college and university examiners. Handbook 1: Cognitive domain. New York, Longmans.
Crossgrove, K. and Curan, K.L. (2008). Using Clickers in Nonmajors- and Majors-Level Biology Courses: Student Opinion, Learning, and Long-Term Retention of Course Material. CBE Life Sci. Educ. 7, 146-154.
Fies, C. and Marshall, J. (2006). Classroom Response Systems: A Review of the Literature. J. Sci. Educ. Tech. 15(1), 101-109.
Freeman, S., O’Connor, E., Parks, J.W., Cunningham, M., Hurley, D., Haak, D., Dirks, C., and Wenderoth, M.P. (2007). Prescribed Active Learning Increases Performance in Introductory Biology. CBE Life Sci. Educ. 6, 132-139.
Preszler, R.W., Dawe, A., Shuster, C.B., and Shuster, M. (2007). Assessment of the Effects of Student Response Systems on Student Learning and Attitudes over a Broad Range of Biology Courses. CBE Life Sci. Educ. 6, 29-41.
Simpson, V., and Oliver, M. (2007). Electronic voting systems for lectures then and now: A comparison of research and practice.
Aust. J. Educ. Tech. 23(2), 187-208.
CU Science Education Initiative and UBC Carl Wieman SEI staff. An instructor’s guide to the effective use of personal response systems (“clickers”) in teaching. http://www.colorado.edu/sei/fac-resources/guide.html
What is your record of innovation in teaching and/or the assessment of learning?
I have co-authored the lab manuals for both the Human Physiology Lab (IPHY 3435) and the Principles of Ecology Lab (EBIO 2040). I’ve been teaching at CU since 1997 and have been actively pursuing effective teaching strategies to enhance student learning, motivation and attitude while re-designing curriculum in many courses in the departments of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology and Integrative Physiology.
Are you able to attend the required meetings as specified in Section 2, Benefits and Expectations?
Yes.
Provide the name and contact information for someone who can serve as a mentor to you within the PTLC program.
Dr. John Basey will participate as my mentor in this project. We have worked together since 1997 and he has been a guiding figure throughout my academic career. Specifically, John and I have had many discussions about the applicability and feasibility of scientific and educational inquiry, and he will continue to assist me in the design and implementation of this project.
Can you suggest an appropriate coach for your project?
Yes. Francoise Benay, an Integrative Physiology associate from the Science Education Initiative, is willing to participate as a coach for this project. She has extensive experience working with iClicker questions, as she has been incorporating this technology and pedagogical tool into the Human Anatomy and Human Physiology lecture courses.
If your project is selected, are you willing to serve as a coach in PTLC in a future year? Yes.
