1. A Faculty Team Works to Create Content Linkages among Various Courses to Increase Meaningful Learning of Targeted Concepts of Microbiology Gili Marbach-Ad, Volker Briken, Ken Frauwirth, Steve Hutcheson, Lian-Yong Gao, Sam Joseph, David Mosser, Daniel C. Stein, Richard C. Stewart, Wenxia Song, Robert Yuan and Ann C. Smith Department of Cell Biology and Molecular Genetics University of Maryland

2. Linking Courses to foster in depth and research oriented learning of Host-Pathogen Interactions CourseLectureLabDiscussStudents General Microbiology ++ On-line 800/yr Microbial Genetics ++ 60 Immunology + +100 Immunology lab + 60 Epidemiology + +70 Pathogenic Microbiology ++ 100 Microbial Pathogenesis + +25 Pre-requisite

3. Linking Courses to foster in depth and research oriented learning of host-pathogen interactions 1.Form a Scientific Teaching Group. 2.Develop bridges between course curricula. (What to teach?) 3.Apply or develop teaching approaches that support in depth and research oriented learning. (How to teach?) 4.Develop an assessment tool.

4. 1. Form a Scientific Teaching Group Approach: Analogous to a Research Group  Research faculty meet to discuss teaching  Group has met monthly :  Meet once a month to discuss research and once month to discuss teaching!  Average attendance: 9 faculty/meeting.

5. Follow with a Scientific Teaching Support Team (ST Support Team) that meets weekly Role:  To review the education literature for presentation to the HPI teaching group. ST Support Team includes the teaching group coordinator, the science education faculty member and a graduate student.  To investigate measures to be developed in the courses (such as case studies, project oriented labs, debates).  To document the research (annual meetings and journals).

6. 2. Develop bridges between curricula of the HPI courses. (What to teach?) Approach:  Define HPI concepts  Choose organisms to serve as anchors for teaching HPI concepts  Streptococcus pneumoniae and Escherichia coli

7. 3. Apply or develop teaching approaches that support in depth and research oriented learning (How to teach?) Spring 2005 Immunology Lab Literature Based Learning Fall 2005 Microbiology Pathogenic Research-Oriented Case Studies Spring 2006 Immunology Lecture Cooperative learning in discussion sessions and Concept Maps

8. 4. Design a tool to assess our curriculum development progress Fall 2004 – Assessment tool to look at depth of understanding (BSCI 417, 424) Spring 2005 – Questions designed to target levels of Blooms taxonomy (BSCI 223, 412, 422) Fall 2005 – Concept Inventory approach Two tier method to create multiple choice questions for a HPI Concept Inventory Odom, & Barrow, (1995). The development and application of a two-tiered diagnostic test measuring college biology students’ understanding of diffusion and osmosis following a course of instruction. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32, 45–61. Anderson, Fisher, Norman, (2002). Development and evaluation of the conceptual inventory of natural selection. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 952-978.

9. Constructing the HPI concept inventory The HPI Concept Inventory development involved three phases: (a) defining the content boundaries of the test (b) obtaining information about students’ alternative conceptions (c) developing the instrument.

10. A. Defining the content boundaries of the test We aimed at concepts required for understanding HPI at a level of sophistication appropriate for microbiology majors. We developed a list of 13 HPI concepts. We all reviewed the content of the concepts to establish validity. “ What do we want our students to truly understand and remember 5 years after they have completed the set of ours courses?”

11. B. Obtaining information about students’ alternative conceptions Based on the HPI concept list, a 23-item two-tier questionnaire was developed First tier questions were multiple choice with two to five choices. Second tier questions requested explanation of first tier responses (explain your answer, or defend your response). Each question covered one or more concepts from the HPI concept list.

12. Two-tier question 3A. Selection of an antibiotic resistant organism is based upon a change in the a. Phenotype b. Genotype c. Both d. Neither e. Either 3B. Defend your response Question 3 covers the HPI concepts: 4. Microbes adapt/respond to environment by altering gene expression. 3.Microbes respond to forces of natural selection. Important responses include changes in virulence and antibiotic resistance. 10. Microbes adapt/respond to the environment by altering their metabolism.

13. Two-tier question 4A. What determines a Gram stain reaction? a. Distinction relating to bacterial structure b. Distinction relating to bacterial function c. both 4B. Defend your response. Question 2 covers the HPI concept: 1. The structural characteristics of a microbe are important in the pathogenicity of that microbe

14. Two-tier questionnaire The 23 questions were piloted – focus group of two graduate students and two undergraduate students. –Results were analyzed by the HPI teaching team. The 23 questions were amended to 17 two-tier questions. The 17 question assessment was distributed via WebCT to –200 students in General Microbiology (introductory class) –60 students in Bacterial Genetics (one of our HPI advanced classes). To limit the time requirement for the students, the delivery of the questions was limited to 5 questions per student. For each question we received –~ 60 responses from the introductory course, –~ 20 responses from the advanced course.

15. We met for one day (9:00am – 4:30pm) to score student responses for alternative conceptions and then to develop multiple-choice questions, that use commonly held alternative conceptions as distractors.

16. Common alternative conceptions Selection of an antibiotic resistant organism is based upon a change in the: (a) Phenotype (b) Genotype (c) Both (d) Neither (e) either –Students didn't understand that selection is based on phenotypes. One student that chose (b) Genotype, wrote, “When an organism becomes resistant to antibiotics (when it acquires an antibiotic-resistant gene that has been inserted as a marker), the organism's genotype has been changed.” –Misconception was with the understanding of the differences between genotype and phenotype. Student wrote, “This must be a change in the genotype because having antibiotic resistance will not necessarily change the look of an organism (phenotype). It will merely allow it to survive in situations where the antibiotic is present.”

17. C. Developing the final instrument The HPI Concept Inventory Following the analysis of all questions, each group built multiple-choice questions for the final assessment tool. For example: Selection of antibiotic resistant transformed bacteria is based upon a change in the: A. phenotype of the bacteria. B. genotype of the bacteria. C. phenotype and genotype of the bacteria. D. genotype and physiology of the bacteria. E. genotype and morphology of the bacteria.

18. Feedback from the faculty members  “…having the group meetings ‘pushed’ us to think and discuss our teaching with our colleagues.”  “The meetings provided support for improving our teaching, especially for new faculty members.”  “…the content discussions in the meetings have caused me to rethink what I have doing.”  “…I learned about educational theories through our group conversations and how they might be applicable to their work.”  “Analyzing questions, according to Bloom taxonomy, help me while formulating my exams.”

19. Next steps 1.HPI scientific teaching group continues to Meet monthly Work on bridging courses’ curricula Work on meaningful learning in each course using anchor organisms and HPI concepts Apply or develop teaching approaches such as Literature based Learning, Case Studies, Concept Maps 2.We will asses our work HPI concept inventory Distributed this fall as pre and post test.