TEACHING AND LEARNING PORTFOLIO - Delta Program · Teaching and Learning Portfolio Jessica TeSlaa 3 Delta Certificate Overview The Delta Program in Research, Teaching and Learning

Teaching and Learning Portfolio Jessica TeSlaa

1

TEACHING AND LEARNING PORTFOLIO

by

Jessica TeSlaa

January 2014

This portfolio submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Delta Certificate in Research, Teaching, and Learning.

Delta Program in Research, Teaching, and Learning

University of Wisconsin-Madison

The Delta Program in Research, Teaching, and Learning is a project of the Center of the Integration of Research, Teaching, and Learning (CIRTL—Grant No. 0227592). CIRTL is a National Science Foundation sponsored initiative committed to developing and supporting a learning community of STEM faculty, post-docs, graduate students, and staff who are dedicated to implementing and advancing effective teaching practices for diverse student audiences. Any opinions, findings and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation. For more information, please call us at 608-261-1180 or visit http://www.delta.wisc.edu.

http://www.delta.wisc.edu/


2

Table of Contents Delta Certificate and Portfolio Overview 3 Teaching and Learning Philosophy 4 Mentoring Philosophy 6 Artifact 1 7 Facilitating pop-up learning communities in an informal setting Artifact 2 9 Using assessment techniques to evaluate and improve learning in an

informal setting Artifact 3 11 Empowering mentees with agency and independence Artifact 4 Reflection 14 Delta Teaching-as-Research internship summative report 16 Figures and Appendices 26


3

Delta Certificate Overview The Delta Program in Research, Teaching and Learning at UW-Madison is a part of the NSF-funded CIRTL Network (Center for the Integration of Research, Teaching and Learning). Delta’s mission is to train a future faculty that is committed to effective teaching practices. Participation in Delta reflects a broad knowledge of formal and informal teaching techniques, implementation of teaching-as-research principles and a commitment to inclusive teaching practices that reflect the diversity of every learning community. I have fulfilled the requirements for a Delta Certificate through 1. Completion of two Delta courses Diversity in the College Classroom: Bridging the Achievement Gap (Spring 2012) Informal Science Education for Scientists: A Practicum (Fall 2010) 2. Participation in the Delta learning community Mentoring Seminar (Summer 2013) Attendance at Delta roundtables and Brown Bag Buzz lunch discussion series 3. Completion of an internship in teaching and learning (Fall 2012)

Designed and integrated group-based learning activities into a 500-student human physiology course, an intervention aimed at reducing the achievement gap between minority students and their peers. Implementation involved the use of formative and summative evaluation techniques, curriculum development, adherence to an IRB Human Subjects Research protocol and collaboration with course instructors and TAs.

4. Presentation and defense of certificate requirements to a committee of educators and researchers

Portfolio Overview This portfolio is a collection of artifacts representing the teaching experiences that have been most critical to my development as a conscientious educator, engaged in continuous improvement of my teaching practice and invested in promoting measurable student learning. Reflections associated with each artifact address how that teaching experience added specific skills to my educator’s toolkit, and also discuss their relevance to the Delta pillars.

The Delta pillars are the core principles upon which those educators completing a Delta certificate build their teaching philosophy. Teaching-as-research holds that teaching and learning share a dynamic, bi-directional relationship, and advocates for measurable definitions of student success. Learning through-diversity teaches that successful educators strive to create equitable learning environments for all students through conscious use of inclusive teaching practices. Learning communities are robust networks of shared learning, through which students accomplish authentic work via cooperation and mutual responsibility.


4

Teaching Philosophy

My mission as an educator is to create a lively, engaged community of learners who feel connected to and supported by their peers and their instructor. Those entering my teaching environment will find that I seek to structure every aspect of the climate to facilitate student learning. As a science educator, I am particularly focused on teaching students how the process of science works, giving them a framework in which to fill in the details of each specific topic. Becoming a reflective practitioner My experiences as a very young graduate teaching assistant (TA) for both small and large courses sparked an early desire to better understand the practice of teaching. As the TA for a large, lecture-based cell biology course, I inherited weekly discussion sections with little direction on how to run them from the course instructor. I quickly discovered that allowing students to just show up and ask whatever questions they had on their mind was not an effective way of promoting student learning or fostering good discussion. Based on this experience, I formalized a structure for the discussion sections and communicated it clearly to the students. I later observed an increase in student participation and enthusiasm, and the birth of a fledgling learning community. Several students subsequently indicated that they found the new format to be a more constructive use of their time.

As a result of these early experiences, I have taken every opportunity to become a more reflective science educator in both formal and informal settings. This effort is embodied by my pursuit of a certificate with the Delta Program in Research, Teaching and Learning while a graduate student at the UW-Madison. Through Delta, I have taught in the classroom, mentored undergraduates, and learned how to apply the body of published educational research to my work. Over time, my approach to teaching has become a continual cycle of experimentation, reflection and revision – similar in many ways to the process of science research.

Promoting learning through inclusive practices

Through my participation in the Delta program, I have seen the power that inclusive teaching practices have to improve learning for all students. One way I create an inclusive learning environment is as simple as taking an individual interest. In a classroom or one-on-one situation, engaging students about their life or how their day has been, even briefly, draws each of them out personally and elevates their experiences to the same level as their peers. Another method of inclusive teaching is to employ cooperative learning in a small group. Small group work impacts two important factors contributing to student success. First, it facilitates the formation of sustainable learning communities. Teaching students how to build lasting, functional connections with their peers and professors both inside and outside the classroom makes a substantial difference in student performance. Second, it provides students who might not have a voice in the larger classroom context with an opportunity to contribute in a less intimidating arena.

I have used this strategy to successfully alter learning outcomes in the classroom. By integrating cooperative learning activities and small group work into the discussion sections of a human physiology course, a group of educators, including myself, were able to both improve the academic performance of all students in the course and also close the gap in


5

achievement between minority students and their peers. Peer-assisted learning and small group work such as this has been shown to reduce the achievement gap for minority students in many contexts.

A final inclusive teaching practice that I have observed and found particularly effective in smaller classes is to ask each student to teach something to their peers. This could include teaching a specific scientific process or concept, or leading the discussion of a piece of primary literature. This strategy allows each individual to share their strengths and skills with the class in the way they feel most comfortable. The knowledge that each student will have to take their turn in front of their peers creates a mutual desire for success. It also requires students to develop a nascent teaching philosophy of their own. As an educator, examining how each student has chosen to impart subject matter to their peers can be very informative as to how they learn.

Diversity is often viewed as a difficult issue to grapple with, but I believe it is an asset to the science teacher. Every classroom is rich with the personal and cultural history of its members, and there are many ways to validate and integrate their experiences to enrich the learning experience for everyone. Assessment as a teaching tool

As a teacher, I am not complacent about my practice. I impart to my students that science and research require rigorous reflection on data and re-evaluation of future directions, and teaching demands no less. Teaching-as-research is a valuable philosophy that advocates collection of data to assess the efficacy of specific teaching strategies. I have found teaching-as-research principles invaluable in both formal classroom and informal community outreach settings. When designing and implementing tabletop activities for family science days at local schools, formative evaluation allowed me to target learning goals to a specific audience. A brief survey completed by visitors to the exhibit subsequently revealed that a significant number of them came away having mastered the desired information, and also provided feedback on ways to reach the population that did not.

In the classroom, I have also used assessment strategies to ask whether teaching strategies were effective. In a large human physiology course, I used surveys and grades to determine whether biographical sketches of scientists paired with cooperative learning activities were able to alter student attitudes and learning outcomes. With the data I generated, it was possible to pair the observed improvements in course grades and decreased drop rate with important influencing factors, such as students’ feelings of social isolation and acceptance. Summary

Teaching and learning work best in an environment where teacher and student are mutually supportive and have a shared responsibility for student learning. This atmosphere is only possible when teachers actively employ teaching-as-research principles and commit to inclusive teaching practices that reflect the diversity of every learning community.


6

Mentoring Philosophy

As an undergraduate at Grinnell College, I took an Immunology course with a visiting professor. The experiments we did in this lab-intensive class were based on the professor’s research as a post-doc. At the beginning of the semester she addressed us as scientists immediately, introducing the pertinent data and orienting us to the state of her field of research. We went into lab energized by our sense of the big picture, knowing why our experiments were important and interesting, and totally in love with the idea that our data might contribute something new. And then, we failed, repeatedly and spectacularly, to generate any data. Our cells were contaminated by fungus from the ecology students, our results were inconclusive, or the experiment simply didn’t work. But our professor had done such a great job with the groundwork that we didn’t feel as though we had failed. We felt like we were learning and growing. I take my college professor as an example of both what a mentor can do and why they are so vital. As a mentor, I promote independence and experimentation in mentees, but am always ready to troubleshoot, provide motivation, or take a moment to teach something brand new. My goal is to set up a sound framework and a safe space in which mentees can learn, make mistakes, and grow their knowledge and skill set.

One way I do this is by careful project planning. Students need to have a project that is both interesting and manageable given their time commitment and personal goals. I get excited with my mentees, and convey to them what parts of their projects are on the fringes of science, where they are truly treading in unknown territory. Second, I work with my mentees on resource building. Rather than giving students an immediate answer to a question, I help them first clearly define what the problem is. Then we talk about general strategies for solving that problem, whether it is scientific or personal, and I encourage them to work on the details themselves. In particular, I make available to mentees resources beyond myself by teaching them how to tackle researching a question on their own, or connecting them with other scientists with more expertise. In this way, they learn critical thinking skills that are widely applicable to more than just a specific experimental problem. Finally, I make sure mentees understand their ownership over their project. I am careful to acknowledge fully the work contributed by the student, and give them a sense of their importance. This frequently includes giving them an opportunity to present their work to the rest of the lab, and encouraging them to take any chance to share research with their peers. Learning how to present data is also a good opportunity to discuss the ethics of research and how to maintain personal standards of quality and integrity.

I find the biggest challenge of mentoring remembering that each mentee is different, and requires a different type of support from a mentor. Finding the right balance of professional and personal, hands-on and independence in the relationship is not always easy, but it is vital. At some point, that supporting framework you have built for mentees to learn within must be removed, and they must step outside on their own. The mentoring relationship may continue, but if the mentorship was a good one, the mentee will eventually learn how to view you as a colleague.

Artifact 1: Facilitating pop-up learning communities in an informal setting


7

Figure 2. Pages from ‘How To Mend A Broken Heart’ flip book. Introduces how zebrafish can be used to mimic a human heart attack and research potential mechanisms and treatments.


8

Artifact 1: Description In collaboration with a post-doc in my thesis lab, I designed a tabletop exhibit with the aim of introducing zebrafish as a model organism to the general public at the Wisconsin Science Festival. The exhibit consisted of three components, including microscopes for embryo observation, a game matching adult animals with their embryonic forms, and a flipbook and movie describing how zebrafish research helps us understand heart attacks in humans. This artifact demonstrates how I use interactive components aimed at different age groups to draw the lay public into impromptu but effective learning communities.

Artifact 1: Reflection

As a member of the graduate student-led Biology Outreach Club, I participated in a wide variety of public outreach events, many of which cater to families with children. This tabletop exhibit represents the first time I designed my own outreach activity.

While developing the components of this exhibit, I consciously incorporated several important factors to facilitate the formation of spontaneous or ‘pop-up’ learning communities consisting of adults, frequently parents, and children. First, the exhibit actively engages people by requiring their participation. One wonderful aspect of tabletop activities presented in an informal setting is that there is no room for authoritative monologue from an expert. The participants use the microscope, observe the embryos, and draw initial conclusions with minimal help from exhibit facilitators.

Second, tabletop activities require collaboration between parent, child and exhibit facilitator. At the zebrafish exhibit, the parent might need to figure out how to use the microscope first, perhaps with a little help from me, and subsequently teach their child. This approach increases engagement of all participants and enriches the learning environment. Interaction among individuals of varied ages and knowledge bases encourages a diversity of viewpoints not present in a more formal learning setting.

Finally, the activities include leading questions to stimulate a continuation of the pop-up learning community after participants have left the exhibit. Frequently, this goal is achieved by relating the science to something with which the public might have more personal experience. In the case of the zebrafish exhibit, I designed a flip-book and paired it with a short video to demonstrate how zebrafish research helps doctors understand and treat heart attacks in humans. This led to discussion among families about how and why other human diseases might be studied in zebrafish.

In implementing this exhibit, I observed the successful formation of many spontaneous learning communities composed of diverse individuals. To my surprise and delight, sometimes these groups consisted of children coming together from multiple families and sometimes they were intergenerational. Witnessing these interactions have prompted me to think about how this informal learning approach might be effectively utilized in a more formal classroom setting – for example, by using brief discussion-based activities in a large lecture format, or by drawing on alumni as resources.


9

Artifact 2: Using assessment techniques to evaluate and improve learning in an informal setting

Figure 1. Oversized, interactive model of a tongue with taste receptors at the UW-Madison Science Expeditions.

Figure 2. Data from summative evaluation of tabletop exhibit on taste.


10

Artifact 2: Description Working with a group of students from a course called Informal Science Education for Scientists, I developed a tabletop exhibit called ‘How Smart is Your Tongue?” The exhibit was designed to teach primarily younger children what taste buds are, how they work, and why we have them. It consisted of three components, including a taste-test for the five tastes, an interactive model tongue with taste buds, and a matching game. This artifact demonstrates how I use front-end assessment techniques to effectively tailor learning goals to a specific audience, and summative techniques to determine the successful achievement of those learning goals.

Artifact 2: Reflection Formative assessment was done while the exhibit was being designed, with members of the target group – in this case, elementary-aged school children. A series of simple questions such as “Point to the part of your body you use to taste” and “Why do foods taste different” revealed the limits of current knowledge in this population, and helped to define reasonable learning goals for the final exhibit. Most children knew that their tongue is sensitive to tastes, only some of them had heard of taste buds, and none of them could describe how taste receptors on the tongue work. For this reason, our interactive tongue stressed understanding the ‘lock and key’ structure of taste receptors with their binding partners as an important learning goal. During implementation of the exhibit, visitors filled out a brief questionnaire designed to answer two basic questions: (1) what parts of the exhibit were successful in the eyes of the participants, and (2) did participants achieve the learning goals. This summative assessment can in turn be used to further refine the approach to teaching desirable learning goals. For example, in an informal setting it is vital to attract attention and pique interest, since the audience is not captive, as you might find in a classroom. It was therefore valuable to confirm that our oversized, interactive tongue attracted people to the exhibit, with almost half the visitors citing that as their main draw. This initial attraction was successfully converted into learning about how the tongue’s taste receptors work in at least 35% of visitors. The summative assessment uncovered an important aspect for future tabletop exhibit design: the importance of teaching to an intergenerational audience. Although I was specifically interested in reaching out to younger children, I observed that if their parents or older companions did not find something interesting or attractive initially, they might not approach the exhibit at all. More importantly, if the older generation shared the learning experience along with the child, they were much more likely to continue the conversation about science as they left the exhibit. In the case of the tongue exhibit, both parents and children were excited about the fifth taste, umami, which most had never heard of.

This project was the first time I used assessment to design and evaluate the success of a teaching technique. Although this was carried out in an informal setting, it was immediately clear how informative this process is when implemented well. I continue to use assessment as a teaching and learning tool in the classroom, both for my students and for myself.

Artifact 3: Empowering mentees with agency and independence


11


12

Figure 1. Slides created and presented during lab meeting by undergraduates that I

mentored, representing some of the design and results of their independent research projects.


13

Artifact 3: Description

I have directly mentored the independent research projects of four undergraduates in the lab as a graduate student. These slides are from the lab meetings during which they organized and presented self-generated data to the lab. This artifact represents my commitment to giving mentees ownership over their project, and assisting their development as scientists until they are able to represent themselves to all members of the lab as colleagues in a shared learning community.

Artifact 3: Reflection I was first tasked with mentoring an undergraduate as a very young graduate student myself. At the time, I had no clear strategy for managing the mentoring relationship or plan for facilitating my mentee’s development. Since my first experience working with undergraduates, I have developed a mentoring philosophy that emphasizes my personal commitment to my mentees’ progression toward membership in the larger community of scientists. My commitment to each mentee’s growth is embodied by my requirement that each student be prepared to present their research to the lab as a whole when their project is ready. To do this, they must of course have successfully completed the benchwork, but I have found that is frequently the easiest step in the process. They must also understand the initial premise and design of their project, be able to ground it in the current literature, interpret their data meaningfully, and propose future directions. More simply, successfully mentored students feel an ownership and pride in their project that goes beyond fulfilling a class requirement or having a job. When they present their work to other scientists, it grants them entry into the community of researchers that might previously have seemed unattainable.

In return, I also take ownership over my own role as a mentor by using each new mentee as an opportunity to enrich my mentoring skillset. Mentoring is a never-ending process of learning and experimentation. Each mentee has different strengths and needs to which I consciously adapt my management strategy. For example, one student struggled with the minutiae of science – how to carry out a specific protocol, why they were performing each step along the way – and required a lot of structured time with me, as well as access to resources about lab techniques. Another student had no trouble with the practical details of benchwork and would have chafed under too much direct oversight, but had to be periodically prompted to take a step back and consider why each experiment was important and how it fit into their project as a whole.

I have found that the principles of ownership and individuality that are important for the mentoring relationship are useful in the classroom as well. It is just as critical in the more formal setting to create vital personal connections between instructor and student, and curate an environment in which student and teacher have a shared responsibility for learning.


14

Artifact 4: Description and Reflection

In the spring of 2012, I participated in a course on teaching science called Diversity in the College Classroom. It was not necessarily my first choice of subject material, but I enrolled anyway. I’m so grateful. My experience in the course and the teaching internship that it led to were transformative for both my teaching skills and my personal outlook.

Both the class and the internship were part of a larger effort on the UW-Madison campus to both study and remedy the achievement gap. The achievement gap is generally defined as an observed disparity in academic success, frequently measured between groups of students with differing identities – for example gender, socioeconomic status, and racial or ethnic identification. In many cases it is first measurable very early on in school and persists through college. Its ramifications extend to the national level, where women and minorities are underrepresented in a number of careers. Most importantly to me, the achievement gap tends to be particularly bad in the sciences.

In collaboration with a faculty mentor, I designed and implemented a teaching intervention meant to reduce the achievement gap in Human Physiology 335. At the UW-Madison, this is a gateway class enrolling a diverse mix of 500 graduate and undergraduate students. The structure of this course is complex and includes a course director, two co-directors, a lab manager, and six teaching assistants. Human physiology also has one of the largest measurable achievement gaps of any large introductory course at the university. Students who identify as ‘targeted minorities’ (defined by the UW-Madison as African-American, Latino, Native American or southeast Asian) are more than three times as likely than their peers to fail or drop human physiology.

My goal was to decrease the disparity in academic performance as measured by final grades and the drop rate. To do this, I researched and wrote 1-2 page biographies of scientists who contributed to our understanding of human physiology. Biography content was closely aligned with concurrent lecture material, and accompanied by pertinent physiology questions. Students completed the brief activities in small groups in their discussion section. Implemented biographies included both minority and non-minority individuals, but their purpose was to ensure minority students had visible role models.

The way in which I structured biographies and the types of questions I asked evolved over the course of the intervention. Students, who are often narrowly focused on learning scientific facts to get a good grade, were initially resistant when presented with something not necessarily ‘on the test’. I learned to introduce historical and cultural context with a great narrative hook, and to integrate it with difficult content-related questions about physiology.

Reducing the achievement gap was a fairly lofty ambition to achieve in a single semester, so I also measured other variables associated with successful outcomes for minority students. Using pre- and post-semester surveys, I queried the openness of students to diversity as well as their perception of science as useful for making practical decisions. With these data, I uncovered baseline differences between targeted minority students and their peers

My Delta internship changed my understanding of the scope of the responsibilities placed on an effective teacher, particularly in the sciences. It can be difficult for a minority student, who may not have many examples of a high-profile minority in their field, to visualize themselves as a successful scientist. But when science is imbued with a scope and context that students relate to, it’s possible for them to write science into their personal narrative.


15

I would emphasize that the knowledge base and skills I have accumulated are not specific to the achievement gap relating to underrepresented minorities in the sciences. Diversity is an ill-defined term, but every classroom has as many learning styles, cultural backgrounds, and personal goals as there are students in the class. Familiarity with culturally responsive curriculum has made me a more complete educator, capable of better serving all students and grounded in an understanding of educational research as well as knowledge of my subject field.

I also believe it’s not prudent to present science as totally equitable and unbiased. When all you have to do is look around the classroom or open a textbook to know that science is historically dominated by white males, ignoring rather than discussing the inequity is simply rubbing salt in the wound. Diversity, or the lack thereof, is a fact, and treating it as inconsequential or avoiding it is ultimately ineffective. This artifact demonstrates how I strive to be comfortable with recognizing diversity, discussing it, and presenting it to students as a way of giving course content a recognizable context that helps them identify personally with science.


16

Using diverse role models and small group activities to close the achievement gap in Human Physiology 335

Abstract

The achievement gap is a term that covers a broad array of observable disparities between groups. One measurable aspect of the achievement gap is the rift in academic performance and outcome between underrepresented minorities and their peers. It is present from very early on in school, remains through graduate school, and impacts the number of minorities represented in a wide variety of professional fields. The achievement gap is particularly troublesome in introductory college science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) courses, where the attrition rate of minorities is high (Handelsman et al., 2007). Here, we demonstrate a disparity between minority students and their peers in Human Physiology 335, a large introductory course at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. We attempted to reduce this inequity by exposing students to biographical material on culturally diverse historical and contemporary physiologists, closely integrated with questions on course content. Assessment of feelings of social isolation, openness to diversity, and attitudes towards science revealed baseline differences in how accepted minority students feel in the campus environment, as well as the context in which they would prefer to encounter science learning. Through our intervention, we improved the grades of all students, and particularly noted an increase positive outcomes for minorities. Introduction

In most of the STEM disciplines, the United States suffers from a disparity between the number of minorities and the number of non-minorities employed in relevant career fields. The underrepresented minority population continues to grow overall, but their share of total doctorates earned in 2008 was only 7.4% (NSF, 2011). This disparity can often be measured from very early on and in many facets of life. However, one common way to study its roots is in school, where it is often referred to as the achievement gap. An achievement gap exists whenever there is a measurable difference in academic participation and performance between any two defined groups of students that is not accounted for by differences in preparedness or education level at the outset. Several groups frequently at a disadvantage at the schooling and employment level are women and minorities.

Universities have a particular problem when it comes to the achievement gap. Large, introductory classes in the STEM disciplines often have a wide disparity in course grades and drop/fail rates that results in the exclusion of minorities from the associated majors. Some universities have identified a group of what they call ‘targeted minorities’ who are subject to frequent inclusion in the achievement gap. Importantly, even when these students are equivalently prepared, with a similar educational background and test scores as their peers, targeted minorities can quickly fall victim to the achievement gap. The systemic nature of the problem, and exclusion of preparedness as a singular explanation, makes it clear that the university systems are failing these students in some way, after their arrival on campus.

The etiology of the achievement gap is complex, with many contributing factors. One potential causative variable is thought to be that minorities can feel very different from their fellow students and unaccustomed to the university setting. African-American college freshmen report feeling isolated, alienated and underrepresented in the university environment (Schwitzer et al., 1999). Minority students are less likely to have role models from their ethnic or cultural background, particularly in the sciences (Nettles and Millett,


17

1999). This is unfortunate, because STEM majors who have a positive image of scientists are more likely to be highly committed to their career of choice (Wyer, 2003).

Science at the university level can also be viewed as cold and impersonal. Johnson (2006) reported two major institutional blockades to minority women’s success in the sciences: “… a narrow focus on decontextualized science and the construction of science as a gender-, ethnicity- and race-neutral meritocracy.” This disconnection and whitewashing results in decreased motivation and persistence among minority students, who may be part of a population of students that doesn’t connect with science when presented as a de-contextualized series of facts. The presentation of science as unbiased is also problematic for underrepresented students, when frequently all they have to do is look around the classroom to know that they are the minority in the scientific community.

One way to solve this dearth of positive minority role models in the sciences is by consciously choosing to include minority scientists in lectures and study materials. Claude Steele (1997) writes about the importance of “affirming domain belongingness” and providing role models to African-American students. A study that added content on women ecologists to lecture and laboratory materials found improvements in student assessment of classroom climate, but no change in attitudes towards women in science (Wyer et al., 2007). This study, however, provided information only on the scientific contribution of women ecologists. Another study in an introductory physics course included biographical material with a life history on female physicists in the lectures, and recorded an shift in student perception of scientists to be more inclusive of women (Marshall and Dorward, 1997). This suggests that careful extension of biographical material to personal information could provide a ‘narrative hook’ for students to develop a more personal connection with role models in whom they perceive something similar to themselves, thereby altering their perceptions and attitudes towards science.

Several studies have used experimental manipulations to show that presentation of female role models affects student performance on a subsequent math test. Simply having a competent female in charge of administering the test improves women’s performance to be equal to men’s (Marx and Roman, 2002). Asking students to read and critique biographies of successful women before taking a math test also eliminates the deficit between women’s and men’s scores (McIntyre et al., 2005). Finally, there is some evidence that presenting minorities as positive role models can influence all students, including any who may have an implicit racial bias. For example, when individuals are confronted with positive African-American historical figures and negative European American historical figures, the automatic preference for white people in an implicit association test was reduced in Caucasians, both immediately after exposure and twenty-four hours later (Dasgupta and Greenwald, 2001).

At the UW-Madison, an achievement gap has been identified in many large introductory courses, including Human Physiology 335, which is a required class for students in a number of disciplines. UW-Madison defines the ‘targeted minorities’ who are disadvantaged by the achievement gap as those who identify as southeast Asian, African-American, Native American or Latino. These students are more than three times as likely to drop or fail human physiology than their peers. This study was designed to introduce short, small-group activities in the discussion section of human physiology, which highlighted the scientific contributions as well as the personal stories of physiologists from a variety of cultural and ethnic backgrounds. We tested the hypothesis that the enriched content would positively influence four areas: (1) feelings of social acceptance and isolation (2) openness to


18

diversity and challenge, (3) attitudes towards the relevance of science and (4) academic success in human physiology. The ultimate goal of this study was to identify classroom conditions that can be manipulated with small content changes to help close the achievement gap. Methods Participants

All 488 students enrolled in Human Physiology 335 in the fall semester of 2012 were

invited to participate in this research study. Of these, 380 consented and returned the pre-survey completed according to instructions, and 317 returned the post-survey at the end of the semester. Of these 317 students, seventeen identified as a targeted minority. There were no significant differences in course grades or academic status between the consenting and non-consenting group of students, but whites were less likely to consent to the study than those identifying with other racial categories, and targeted minorities and women were more likely to consent. A breakdown of the school status and racial demographics of these populations is shown in Figure 1. Procedure

During the intervention semester, discussion section attendance in Human Physiology was made mandatory for the first time, and a small number of points were awarded for attendance.

Biographies of five scientists were researched and written specifically for integration with the Human Physiology 335 syllabus (two examples shown in Appendix A). Scientists were selected for their immediate relevance to concurrent lecture material. Each biography was between one and two pages and included a prominent photograph of the scientist. At least three questions were written to complement each biography as well as concurrent lecture and reading material. Two of the biographies were of underrepresented minorities (an African-American male and a Hispanic female), while three were not. Biographies were structured to include at least three critical elements: (1) The activities were administered during the mandatory discussion sections by teaching assistants, and designed to be completed in about ten minutes, (2) The biographies explicitly addressed both the life history of their subject as well as their scientific contributions, (3) Questions to be answered by students were closely related to both research done by physiologists in the biography and the content of concurrent lectures.

Each of twenty 25-student discussion sections was formed into randomly assigned groups of 5 students. These groups remained consistent throughout semester, and worked together every week, even when class activities were not related to the scientist biographies. No credit was assigned for completed activities, although they were collected by teaching assistants at the end of each period.

Attitudinal surveys were administered by a researcher who was not a teaching assistant or lecturer during the first discussion section and the last discussion section of the semester. These pre- and post-surveys consisted of 35 identical questions (see Appendix B). All responses were measured using a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 0 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). In addition, two short-answer questions on the post-survey


19

addressed whether students remembered content from the biographical activities administered throughout the semester. Students were told that the survey was part of research to improve instructional quality in the human physiology course. Students were also informed that their responses were confidential, their participation was voluntary, and that they could withdraw at any time.

Course outcome was measured by final grade distribution, with ‘adverse’ defined as a D, F or drop. Grades from the intervention semester (Fall 2012) were compared to grades from the previous four fall semesters, which had the same course instructors and the same test questions.

Measures Feelings of social acceptance and isolation. A subset of survey questions (1-13) assessed students’ feelings of social acceptance and social isolation in the context of their peers on the university campus. Statements included “I can really be myself at this university” and “Sometimes I feel as if I don’t belong here.” Openness to diversity. A second subset of survey questions (14-25) assessed students’ attitude towards diversity. Seven items from the Wabash Liberal Arts Openness to Diversity and Challenge Survey were used. Five additional items were adapted to specifically address openness to diversity in science. Statements included “The courses I most enjoy are those that make me think about things from a different perspective” and “I enjoy learning about the historical and cultural context of scientific discoveries.” Relevance of science. A third subset of survey questions (26-35) assessed students’ perception of science as relevant and important to everyday life. Ten items were adapted from the CLASS survey (Adams et al., 2004). Statements included “It is wrong to have personal feelings about the scientific issues I’m considering” and “Learning biology that is not directly relevant or applicable to human health is not worth my time.” Retention of biographical information. Two additional short answer questions (36-37) were presented on the post-survey to assess whether students could recall information from the biographies they read during the semester. The questions were “Please name one physiologist” and “Describe the field they contributed to in 2 sentences or less.” Statistics Statistically significant differences between targeted minority and non-targeted students, pre- and post-survey responses, and course outcomes were measured by two methods: (1) a two-tailed T-test with unequal variance and (2) a Chi-square test of independence of the distribution of responses. Results Targeted minorities feel more socially isolated than their peers

Based on pre-survey data, we made several baseline observations about the incoming students. First, minority students are consistently less likely than their peers to feel socially accepted by others on campus, and more likely to experience feelings of social isolation. This is true for all thirteen statements in this subsection of the survey. In many cases, these


20

differences were statistically significant by one or both measures used (examples shown in Figure 2). Changes in attitude pre- and post-intervention are less consistent, with responses to some statements showing greater feelings of social acceptance among targeted minorities in the post-survey, while responses to other statements indicated movement in the opposite direction. It is important to note that, likely due to the small sample size, none of the pre- to post-survey changes in the targeted minority subgroup were significant.

Interestingly, the data for non-targeted students show a consistent trend towards greater feelings of social isolation on the post-survey, after the intervention. Minorities value cultural context and diversity of opinion more than their peers

Pre-survey data revealed another important observation about the differences in attitude between targeted minority students and non-targeted students. Targeted minorities are consistently more likely than their peers to agree with statements valuing the cultural context of science. They also place more importance on experiencing perspectives that differ from their own (examples shown in Figure 3). Importantly, the aggregated responses of all students indicated a relatively high level of ambivalence about the value of having their beliefs challenged in the context of a science classroom, or learning the cultural context of important scientific discoveries.

Comparison of pre- and post-survey responses in the non-targeted student subpopulation revealed that these students were consistently less likely to report valuing cultural context and diversity after the intervention. This data trend was not observed among targeted minorities, where there were again no statistically significant changes in attitude. Biographies can be a useful teaching tool The vast majority of students were able to correctly name a physiologist, and 64% went on to accurately describe some aspect of their scientific contribution. Seventy percent of students specifically recalled a scientist from the biography activities. Of these, over half wrote down the same scientist – Vivien Thomas. The biography of Vivien Thomas presented a particularly compelling life story, coupled with an astonishing set of scientific achievements; namely, responsibility for the first successful human heart transplant (see Appendix A). These data support that biographies can be successfully adapted into small-group activities that support learning. They further suggest that the selection of biography subject can play a role in student retention of information. The final course outcome for all students is improved by mandatory discussion section attendance and small group biographical activities The final course outcome for all students was improved during the intervention semester as compared with previous semesters. Non-targeted students experienced a positive shift in their grade distribution, resulting in a higher proportion of students receiving better grades and a reduction in students with an adverse outcome (D’s and F’s) (Figure 4). The shift in grade distribution for targeted minorities was not as dramatic, but they received B’s in higher proportions than previous years, and C’s in lower proportions (Figure 5). Most importantly, the achievement gap was narrowed by at least one measure. The proportion of minority students achieving a positive course outcome (A’s, B’s and C’s) increased, and


21

moved closer to the ‘ideal’ line demarcating equality between non-targeted students and targeted minorities (Figure 6). However, the disparity in academic achievement was by no means eliminated through this intervention. Discussion This project identified baseline differences in attitudes between members of minority groups identified by the UW-Madison as part of a campus-wide achievement gap and their peers. Implementation of a multi-pronged intervention, comprised of mandatory discussion sections featuring cooperative learning activities highlighting a diverse group of role models in physiology, resulted in improved course outcomes for all students. Surprisingly, these improved outcomes were accompanied by a decrease in openness to diversity and challenge among non-targeted students, and no significant change in attitudes among targeted minorities. Complications of intervention design Two aspects of this intervention complicate the interpretation of the study results. First, the multiple aspects of the intervention make it impossible to determine which was causative of the improved student outcomes. Second, the discussion sections in Human Physiology are taught solely by a group of six teaching assistants. This means that small group formation and implementation of the biographical activities was not facilitated by course instructors but rather by graduate students with different teaching styles and different levels of investment in the project. This variability in implementation was further compounded about halfway through the semester, when feedback from students, teaching assistants and course instructors led us to redesign the biographical activities somewhat, more closely integrating questions with concurrent lecture content. Going forward, we have identified two key areas to improve project design. First, the biographies should be rewritten according to a rubric, such that their content and structure is standardized as much as possible. Second, the next semester of data should be compared with the Fall 2012 data, as this comparison will eliminate the variable of making discussion sections mandatory. It would likely also be beneficial if the scientists and their research highlighted in the cooperative learning activities were introduced during lecture time, in order to more fully integrate the intervention into the culture of the course. Presentation of biographical material (and likely surveys) matters Although this project was not designed to systematically collect data on whether students like the biographical activities or not, we did receive anecdotal evidence of their negative reactions from teaching assistants, course instructors, and unsolicited feedback on post-surveys. These primarily consisted of students who felt that the cooperative learning activities were a waste of their time, which could be better spent working on more traditional problem sets. Given that there were only five, 10-minute biographical activities dispersed throughout the semester, this reaction was somewhat surprising. We speculate that some of the negative reactions might have been amplified by a combination of ‘priming’, when students’ attention was drawn to the issue of diversity in the sciences by the pre-survey,


22

followed by the unfamiliar presentation of the small group activities to students more accustomed to the lecture format. It is also important to note that dissatisfaction was volunteered by a small group of students, with no effort on our part to solicit feedback from an unbiased sample. Despite negative changes in attitude, non-targeted students experienced better outcomes One interesting aspect of this project is that despite the pushback from students on the nature of the cooperative learning activities, the differing approaches of teaching assistants during implementation, and the negative changes in attitude on the openness to diversity and challenge scale among non-targeted students, the outcome for these students was nevertheless improved, as it was for the targeted minorities. Although it would be ideal for students to understand and value the cultural context of scientific discoveries, and to appreciate diversity and challenge during discourse, it is difficult to change the culture of a large course in one semester. This study represents a first attempt to imbue the science of physiology with cultural context and provide minority role models, and provides many ideas for improving content presentation and integration in future semesters. Given the positive results already obtained, we think this is a worthwhile pursuit. Attitudes towards the relevance of science don’t seem to be an important indicator of achievement in this context One subsection of the survey has not been addressed in this paper, the measure of attitudes towards science. There were some interesting data to be gleaned from these questions, including that targeted minorities are more likely to believe that having personal feelings about scientific issues is wrong, and less likely to consider biology as relevant to the real world. However, taken together, there were few differences between minorities and their peers’ baseline attitudes towards science, and no significant changes in attitudes over the course of the semester. We are left with a lack of data indicating that providing students with scientific role models has any bearing on their personal relationship and attitudes towards science. We still believe this is an interesting connection to investigate in the future. Summary

Altogether, this study presents important information about attitudinal differences between targeted minorities and non-targeted students, as well as a successful attempt to reduce the achievement gap, by at least some measures. This success is somewhat tempered by an inability to identify the sole source of this improvement and a lack of association between positive changes in attitudes with the improved course outcomes. However, this intervention specifically improved learning outcomes for minority students, while not harming, and in some cases improving, the performance of the entire student population. The identification of several attitudinal variables as likely contributing factors to the achievement gap provides valuable baseline data both for improving the structure of these biographical cooperative learning activities specifically, and targeting other, future efforts more effectively. Importantly, the intervention described here is highly scalable and a good candidate for broad implementation in a variety of learning environments. The


23

cooperative learning activities are brief, and can be successfully implemented by teaching assistants in a context outside of the lecture.


24

References Adams, W.K., Perkins, K.K., Dubson, M., Finkelstein, N.D. and Wieman, C.E. (2004). The design and validation of the Colorado Learning Attitudes about Science survey. PERC Proceedings, 790, 45-48. Dasgupta, N. and Greenwalkd, A.G. (2001). On the malleability of automatic attitudes: combating automatic prejudice with images of admired and disliked individuals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81(5), 800-814. Handelsman, J., Miller, S. and Pfund, C. (2007). Scientific Teaching. New York, NY: W.H. Freeman and Company. Johnson, A.C. (2007). Unintended consequences: how science professors discourage women of color. Science Education, 91(5): 805-821. Marshall, J.A. and Dorward, J.T. (1997). The effect of introducing biographical material on women scientists into the introductory physics curriculum. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 3(4), 279-294. McIntyre, R.B., Lord, C.G., Gresky, D.M., Ten Eyck, L.L., Jay Frye, G.D. and Bond, C.F. (2005). A social impact trend in the effects of role models on alleviating women’s mathematics stereotype threat. Current Research in Social Psychology, 10(9), 116-136. Nettles, M.T. and Millett, C.M. (1999). The human capital liabilities of underrepresented minorities in pursuit of science, mathematics and engineering doctoral degrees. Research News on Minority Graduate Education, 1(2). National Science Foundation, National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics. (2011). Women, Minorities, and Persons with Disabilities in Science and Engineering: 2011. Special Report NSF 11-309. Arlington, VA. Available at http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/wmpd/. Schwitzer, A.M., Griffin, O.T., Ancis, J.R. and Thomas, C.R. (1999). Social adjustment experiences of African American college students. Journal of Counseling and Development. 77(2), 189-197. Steele, C.M (1997). A threat in the air: how stereotypes shape intellectual identity and performance. American Psychologist, 52(6), 613-629. Wabash National Study. http://www.liberalarts.wabash.edu/study-instruments#diversity. Accessed May 8, 2012. Wyer, M. (2003). Intending to stay: images of scientists, attitudes toward women, and gender as influences on persistence among science and engineering majors. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering. 9(1), 1-16.

http://www.liberalarts.wabash.edu/study-instruments#diversity


25

Wyer, M., Murphy-Medley, D., Damschen, E.I., and Rosenfeld, K.M. (2007). No quick fixes: adding content about women to ecology course materials. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 31(1), 96-102.

Sources for Diverse Role Models

SACNAS (Society for the Advancement of Chicanos and Native Americans in Science) Biography Project http://sacnas.org/ The Faces of Science: African-Americans in Science

https://webfiles.uci.edu/mcbrown/display/faces.html JustGarciaHill http://jgh.hunter.cuny.edu/ The History Makers http://www.thehistorymakers.com/

http://sacnas.org/

https://webfiles.uci.edu/mcbrown/display/faces.html

http://jgh.hunter.cuny.edu/

http://www.thehistorymakers.com/


26

Figures Figure 1. Class composition of Human Physiology 335. Class of 488 enrolled students broken down by student status and aggregated racial identification, as reported to the UW-Madison by students.


27

Figure 2. Targeted minority students feel a greater sense of social isolation than their peers. Averaged responses of non-targeted (red) and targeted minority students (blue) to questions about feelings of social isolation on the pre-survey. Targeted minority students

consistently report experiencing more feelings of social isolation than their peers (p0.01 for each individual question).


28

Figure 3. Targeted minority students place more value on cultural context and diversity of opinion than their peers. Distribution of responses from non-targeted (red) and targeted minority students (blue) to several pre-survey questions about cultural context in the science classroom. Targeted minority students are more likely to report interest in cultural context of science and diversity of opinion. P-values derived from chi-square test of independence.


29

Figure 4. Non-targeted students experienced improved course outcomes during the intervention semester. Comparison of course outcomes for non-targeted students for five consecutive fall semesters, including the intervention semester of Fall 2012. Asterisks demarcate significant increases in positive outcomes (A, B) and decreases in negative outcomes (BC, C, F) when compared with previous years’ grade data.


30

Figure 5. Targeted minority students experienced improved outcomes during the intervention semester. Comparison of course outcomes for targeted minority students for five consecutive fall semesters, including the intervention semester of Fall 2012. Asterisks demarcate significant increases in positive outcomes (B’s) and decreases in negative outcomes (C’s) when compared with previous years’ grade data.


31

Figure 6. Closure of the achievement gap in positive outcomes between targeted minorities and their peers. The purple diamond indicates data from Fall 2012, the intervention semester, green diamonds are data from each of four previous semesters, while the black line demarcates the ‘ideal’ of equality between targeted minorities and their peers.


32

Appendix A: Biographies of Physiologists

Activity Four: Researchers in Physiology Read the biography of the researcher, and discuss. Have the recorder write your answers down: 1. What change from the normal pattern of blood flow would occur in a person with a constriction of the pulmonary artery and a hole in the interventricular septum? 2. Why would this altered pattern of blood flow make a baby’s lips and skin turn blue? 3. Explain how Vivian Thomas’ innovative surgery changed blood flow, and how that improved the condition of patients with Blue Baby Syndrome CARDIOVASCULAR PHYSIOLOGY

Vivien Thomas (1910-1985) In the early 1900’s, when a baby was born with blue skin and lips, there was little hope they would survive past childhood. ‘Blue baby syndrome’ was the common name for a congenital heart defect in which there is a constriction of the pulmonary artery and a large hole in the interventricular septum. The young scientist Vivien Thomas devised a surgical cure for this devastating condition, and in the process helped invent the field of cardiac surgery. Vivien Thomas was born in Louisiana and moved to Nashville, Tennessee as a child. In 1929 when the American stock market crashed and the Great Depression followed, 19-year-old Thomas lost his life savings and his dream of attending medical school. Instead, he secured a job as a laboratory assistant for Dr. Alfred Blalock at Vanderbilt

University.


33

Thomas, previously a carpenter, quickly became indispensible in the lab. He learned how to do delicate heart surgeries in dogs, advancing the field of cardiac physiology. Thomas was an equal partner in Blalock’s groundbreaking work on traumatic shock. Together, they proved the physiological effects of shock were alleviated by fluid replacement, thereby saving the lives of countless soldiers in World War II. All the while, Thomas earned twelve dollars a week and was classified as a janitor by Vanderbilt. When Blalock was offered the position of Chief of Surgery at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, Maryland, in 1941, he insisted that his lab manager Vivien Thomas come with him to this segregated hospital. Once there, Thomas discovered that he couldn’t wear a lab coat in the hallways without shocking the white hospital staff. Despite this, Thomas blazed the trail for the breakthrough in blue baby syndrome. Using dogs with a similar condition, he learned that there was almost instantaneous improvement when he surgically connected the subclavian artery (a large branch off of the arch of the aorta) to the pulmonary artery. The first such surgery in a human was in 1944 on a 9-pound infant girl, and it was a success. Blalock, who performed the surgery, had only done it once before – as Thomas’ assistant, and on a dog. Thomas, who stood just behind Blalock to offer technical advice, had completed the surgery hundreds of times. The surgical tools Blalock used on the young girl were those that Thomas himself had designed and had made for dog surgeries. Anna was the name of the first dog that survived surgery under Thomas’ sure hands, and she became a fixture in the lab at Hopkins, much like Thomas. Though he never graduated from college, Vivien Thomas was appointed an instructor of surgery at Johns Hopkins in 1976, awarded an honorary doctorate, and personally trained what was to be the first generation of modern heart surgeons. Sources and Further References Johns Hopkins University: http://www.medicalarchives.jhmi.edu/page1.htm PBS documentary: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/partners/index.html Vivien Thomas autobiography, Partners of the Heart Katie McCabe, Like Something the Lord Made, 1989, The Washingtonian

http://www.medicalarchives.jhmi.edu/page1.htm

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/partners/index.html


34

Tetralogy of Fallot, or blue baby syndrome: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmedhealth/PMH0002534/

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmedhealth/PMH0002534/


35

Activity Six: Researchers in Physiology Read the biography of the researcher, and discuss the questions that follow. Have the recorder write your answers down. RENAL PHYSIOLOGY

Tadashi Inagami (b. 1931) In 1945, when Tadashi Inagami was 14 years old, he and the rest of his schoolmates in Kyoto, Japan, were sent to munitions factories to help build aircraft engines. This World War II experience, grinding oil pump pistons down to micrometer precision, instilled a sense of pride in careful accuracy that stuck with him through his scientific career. Inagami eventually finished two doctorates, one at Yale University in the United States in biophysical chemistry. His second degree in

nutritional chemistry degree he earned back in Kyoto, where he was required to return as a condition of his Fulbright scholarship. For a time, Inagami’s stipend as a graduate student helped support his family, as Japan’s post-war economy recovered. However, in 1962 Inagami took his new wife Masako back to the United States, where he obtained a position at Vanderbilt University. While investigating the structure of epidermal growth factor (EGF) with a colleague, Inagami stumbled across another protein called renin in the mouse salivary glands he was using as a source of EGF. First identified in 1898 as a substance secreted by the kidneys, isolation of renin itself had remained elusive for over 70 years. Inagami’s expertise in protein chemistry allowed him to purify and sequence the renin enzyme and identify it as a protease. This ground-breaking work was published in 1972, and over the next several decades of his career, Inagami relentlessly added to our knowledge of the renin-angiotensin system. He identified the active site of renin, and demonstrated that it acts very specifically on the hormone precursor angiotensinogen. Inagami also cloned and characterized angiotensin receptors. Today, Tadashi Inagami continues his research at Vanderbilt, and has contributed to almost 550 publications. He also continues to support the Japanese researchers who come to the United States for training, taking them into his home and mentoring them through their scientific and more mundane difficulties. When


36

speaking with a reporter from Vanderbilt, Inagami said “I probably should have retired five or six years ago. I didn’t do it because other research areas began to show up related to renin and angiotensin … I just wanted to settle it.” Sources and Further References Beyond borders: Inagami’s global scientific odyssey. Melissa Marino. http://www.mc.vanderbilt.edu/reporter/index.html?ID=4858 Hall, J.E. 2003. Historical Perspective of the Renin-Angiotensin System. Mol. Biotech. 24(1): 27-39. Questions:

1. What are the downstream physiological effects of renin release?

2. What is the relationship of the renin-angiotensin system to aldosterone?

3. In terms of drug development, why would it be important to identify renin’s active site? What effect would a drug designed to block renin’s active site have on blood pressure? On renal function?

http://www.mc.vanderbilt.edu/reporter/index.html?ID=4858


37

Appendix B: Post-survey

General Instructions: Circle the number that indicates the extent to which you agree/disagree with each of the following statements about your views or perspectives in general. There is neither a right nor wrong answer to any question. Please do your best to provide complete information. However, if you cannot respond to an item, feel free to leave the response blank. Please rate the following statements according to the following scale: 1 – Strongly Disagree 2 – Disagree 3 – Neutral 4 – Agree 5 – Strongly agree Disagree Neutral Agree

1. I am treated with as much respect as other students. 1 2 3 4 5

2. People at this university are friendly to me. 1 2 3 4 5

3. Other students here like me the way I am. 1 2 3 4 5

4. I can really be myself at this university. 1 2 3 4 5

5. I feel proud of belonging to this university. 1 2 3 4 5

6. People here notice when I’m good at something. 1 2 3 4 5

7. I am included in lots of activities at this university. 1 2 3 4 5

8. I feel like a real part of this university. 1 2 3 4 5

9. Other students in this university take my opinions seriously.

1 2 3 4 5

10. It is hard for people like me to be accepted here. 1 2 3 4 5

11. I feel very different from most other students here. 1 2 3 4 5

12. Sometimes I feel as if I don’t belong here. 1 2 3 4 5

13. I wish I were in a different university. 1 2 3 4 5

14. I enjoy having discussions with people whose ideas and values are different from my own.

1 2 3 4 5

15. The real value of a college education lies in being introduced to different values.

1 2 3 4 5

16. Learning about people from different cultures is a very important part of my college education.

1 2 3 4 5

17. I enjoy thinking about science from different perspectives.

1 2 3 4 5


38

18. Contact with individuals whose backgrounds (e.g. race, national origin, sexual orientation) are different from my own is an essential part of my college education.

1 2 3 4 5

19. The courses I enjoy most are those that make me think about things from a different perspective.

1 2 3 4 5

20. I enjoy taking courses that challenge my beliefs and values.

1 2 3 4 5

21. I enjoy talking with people who have values different from mine because it helps me better understand myself.

1 2 3 4 5

22. I enjoy having discussions about science with people whose ideas and values are different from my own.

1 2 3 4 5

23. I enjoy learning about the historical and cultural context of scientific discoveries.

1 2 3 4 5

24. Learning about scientists from different cultures is a very important part of my science education.

1 2 3 4 5

25. Learning the historical and cultural context of scientific discoveries adds valuable insight to my understanding of science.

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

26. It is wrong to have personal feelings about the scientific issues I’m considering.

1 2 3 4 5

27. I use science to help me make better choices about my life (eg. what food to eat, which car to buy).

1 2 3 4 5

28. The subject of biology has little relation to what I experience in the real world.

1 2 3 4 5

29. Personal feelings can be relevant to making choices in science.

1 2 3 4 5

30. I study science because I want to make a contribution to society.

1 2 3 4 5

31. Science helps me understand the effect I have on the environment.

1 2 3 4 5

32. Science helps me prepare for major decisions about my future.

1 2 3 4 5

33. Learning biology that is not directly relevant or applicable to human health is not worth my time.

1 2 3 4 5

34. Caring about consequences for other people can be part of a scientific choice (eg. spraying pesticides, developing a vaccine).

1 2 3 4 5

35. To understand biology, I sometimes think about my personal experiences and relate them to the topic at hand.

1 2 3 4 5

Please name one physiologist:___________________________________________ Describe the field they contributed to in 2 sentences or less. If you can remember a physiologist’s work, but not their name, please share that with us anyway.


39

TEACHING AND LEARNING PORTFOLIO - Delta Program · Teaching and Learning Portfolio Jessica TeSlaa 3 Delta Certificate Overview The Delta Program in Research, Teaching and Learning

Documents