Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education最新文献

In this article, we describe curricular materials developed to engage undergraduate students in evolutionary thinking around antibiotic resistance using the MEGA-plate experiment (Microbial Evolution and Growth Arena). This elegant and visual experiment, developed by the Kishony Lab, shows the development of antibiotic resistance on the timescale of hours and days. It not only provides important biological insights but also captures students' attention, making it a very useful tool for education. While a short video describing the method and major results has already been widely used in the classroom setting, our case study connects details of the methods and results of the MEGA-plate experiment and antibiotic resistance to core biological concepts. The interrupted case study consists of four major parts: 1) an opening hook activity to capture students' attention and introduce the antibiotic crisis, 2) a jigsaw activity to research different classes of antibiotic targets and the resistance mechanisms that can arise, 3) a discussion of antibiotic resistance in real-time using the MEGA-plate experiment video, and 4) three different options for students to dive deeper into the experimental data from the MEGA-plate research article. These components are modular and can be used in many different combinations to reach different audiences or connect to other topics related to microbiology, evolution, or genetics.

Students in STEM know well the stress, challenge, and effort that accompany college exams. As a widely recognizable feature of the STEM classroom experience, high-stakes assessments serve as crucial cultural gateways in shaping both preparation and motivation for careers. In this essay, we identify and discuss issues of power around STEM exams to further the understanding of exam practices that can unjustly hold students back. Through theory and practical examples, we consider the numerous ways in which power manifests both on and off the pages of the exams themselves, as well as ways in which power is consolidated away from students through logistical norms and tradeoffs. Centering the "rules of the culture of power" as delineated by Dr. Lisa Delpit, we reflect on exam practices that prioritize faculty voice and faculty convenience above student learning and student identity. We share some of what we have learned from our students as part of a call to improve STEM education by relinquishing some of our exam-related power over students, redistributing it to students so that they have more power to shape their own education.

Active learning, including student thinking and discussion in class, has been shown to increase student learning gains. However, it is less clear how instructor-level variation in the implementation and timing of active learning activities affects student gains. Our study aims to investigate the extent to which the time spent on individual episodes of active learning activities influences student performance. We hypothesized that instructors who let students spend more time on peer discussion and individual thinking on practice problems associated with particular learning objectives would have better student exam scores on exam questions addressing those objectives. To test this hypothesis, we obtained a large data set of classroom recordings and student exam scores from an introductory biology course at a large 4-year university, where three instructors shared identical teaching materials and exams for different course offerings. Contrary to our hypothesis, although the three instructors spent significantly different amounts of time on episodes of thinking and peer discussion, there was no correlation between the total time spent on active learning activities and student performance on exam questions. Linear mixed-effects modeling of the effect of the length of episodes of student thinking and discussion on exam score found that in the context of shared instructional materials, the amount of course time spent on active learning activities did not reliably predict student performance on associated exam questions. This result held true even when only considering learning objectives with high variations in performance between offerings, difficult exam questions, or exam questions requiring higher-order thinking skills. Although our study was only conducted in one course, our results imply that time spent per individual episode of student thinking or peer discussion may not be the primary factor explaining the positive effects of active learning and that it may be worthwhile to explore other factors.

Career planning and exploration are often seen as "out of class" work-important but separate from disciplinary learning. This separation forces students to find time outside their already demanding schedules and to navigate unfamiliar higher education spaces, creating structural barriers and impeding access to these resources. In an effort to create more equitable access to career exploration and education, we developed the "in real life" (IRL) curriculum to provide students with opportunities to reflect on how their academic experiences align with their broader career goals within the context of their introductory biology course. Grounded in Marcia's Theory of Identity Development and the Social Cognitive Career Theory, the curriculum includes modules on identifying and articulating professional purpose, developing primary and parallel career plans, constructing resumes, developing interview strategies, and building professional networks. Implemented over two semesters at a large R1 university, the IRL curriculum helped students shift from a destination-driven approach to a purpose-driven approach in relation to their careers, increased their career-related self-efficacy, and gave them a better understanding of career outcome expectations. IRL helps students contextualize how the knowledge and skills from class align with their career paths, emphasizing the importance of bringing career development into a disciplinary learning space.

While graduate student teaching assistants (TAs) contribute significantly to university education, many graduate programs across diverse disciplines offer limited formal pedagogical training. In turn, many researchers informally develop teaching and mentoring skills as they advance to faculty positions or related careers. This can perpetuate a lag in the implementation of inclusive educational environments despite the clear benefits demonstrated by recent pedagogical research. For instance, the integration of inclusive teaching strategies like universal design for learning, growth mindset feedback, and the use of relatable role models in curricula may help increase the persistence, success, and self-efficacy of traditionally underrepresented groups in the sciences. Additionally, research indicates that training graduate TAs in evidence-based practices may have benefits beyond teaching efficacy, such as greater confidence in research preparedness and science communication-skills applicable to any scientific field or career path. Here, we developed and implemented an inclusive teaching series for a marine science department that included: (i) campus-wide pedagogical journal article discussions and knowledge-sharing, (ii) expert-led interactive workshops on evidence-based teaching strategies, and (iii) a graduate TA professional development module on inclusive lesson planning with opportunities to teach and receive feedback. Based on our experiences, we share a framework and resources to facilitate a broader adoption of formalized TA training in inclusive teaching practices within graduate programs across a variety of fields.

Effective scientific communication is crucial for undergraduate students to succeed in future graduate or professional careers in the biomedical sciences. Peer review and constructive criticism are essential to producing written science communications. Unfortunately, training in how to perform peer review and incorporate constructive criticism is minimal in undergraduate science courses. Here, I describe a senior thesis course for immunology and microbiology majors that encourages students to integrate iterative peer review to improve their writing skills and their ability to incorporate feedback. In this course, students are expected to complete one of the following written projects that focuses on an immunological disorder or infectious disease: a research proposal, a case study, or a meta-analysis/systematic review. Each project is separated into six assignments, and each assignment is assessed through specifications (SPECS)-based grading and peer review where students have multiple attempts to improve their scores on each assignment. Approximately 40% of each student's grade is based on their ability to incorporate feedback from peers and instructors. Preliminary survey results suggest that students are eager to learn how to effectively incorporate peer and instructor feedback. Enhancing training in peer review will encourage students to embrace constructive criticism, which will be essential for their future careers. Initial findings indicate that students are positively engaging with the peer-review process, and the use of SPECS grading fosters a growth mindset. Continued research will further explore how this method can enhance students' confidence and skill in integrating feedback into professional scientific communication.

Students with strong metacognitive skills are positioned to learn and achieve more than peers who are still developing their metacognition. Yet, many students come to college without well-developed metacognitive skills. As part of a longitudinal study on metacognitive development, we asked when, why, and how first-year life science majors use metacognitive skills of planning, monitoring, and evaluating. Guided by the metacognition framework, we collected data from 52 undergraduates at three institutions using semi-structured interviews. We found that first-year students seek study recommendations from instructors, peers, and online resources when they plan their study strategies. First-year students struggle to accurately monitor their understanding and benefit when instructors help them confront what they do not yet know. First-year students evaluate the effectiveness of their study plans at two specific points: immediately after taking an exam and/or after receiving their grade on an exam. While first-year students may be particularly open to suggestions on how to learn, they may need help debunking myths about learning. First-year students acknowledge they are still learning to monitor and welcome formative assessments that help them improve the accuracy of their monitoring. First-year students may be primed to receive guidance on their metacognition at the points when they are most likely to evaluate the effectiveness of their study strategies and plans. Based on our results, we offer suggestions for instructors who want to support first-year students to further develop their metacognition.

It has become increasingly important for microbiology educators to help students learn critical concepts of the discipline. This is particularly true in virology, where current challenges include increasing rates of vaccine hesitancy, misinformation about the COVID-19 pandemic, and controversy surrounding research on pathogens with pandemic potential. Having students learn virology can attract more people to the field and increase the number of people who can engage in meaningful discourse about issues relating to the discipline. However, the limited number of virologists who teach undergraduates, combined with the fact that many institutions lack stand-alone virology courses, results in virology often being taught as a limited number of lectures within an undergraduate microbiology course (if it is covered at all), which may or may not be taught by an individual trained as a virologist. To provide a framework to teach virology to undergraduate students, a team of virology educators, with support from the American Society for Virology (ASV), developed curriculum guidelines for use in a stand-alone undergraduate virology course or a virology section within another course (D. B. Kushner et al., J Virol 96:e01305-22, 2022, https://doi.org/10.1128/jvi.01305-22). These guidelines are available at the ASV website (https://asv.org/curriculum-guidelines/). To assist educators in implementing these guidelines, we created examples of measurable learning objectives. This perspective provides details about the virology curriculum guidelines and learning objectives and accompanies the perspective by Boury et al. in this issue of the Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education (25:e00126-24, 2024, https://doi.org/10.1128/jmbe.00126-24) about the recent revision of the microbiology curriculum guidelines overseen by the American Society for Microbiology.

Generative artificial intelligence (GAI) offers increased accessibility and personalized learning, though the potential for inaccuracies, biases, and unethical use is concerning. We present a newly developed research paper assignment that required students to utilize GAI. The assignment was implemented within three online, asynchronous graduate courses for medical laboratory sciences. Student learning was assessed using a rubric, which rated students' effective integration and evaluation of GAI-generated content against peer-reviewed research articles, thus demonstrating their critical thinking and synthesis skills, among other metrics. Overall rubric scores were high, suggesting that learning outcomes were met. After field testing, we administered a 16-item survey about GAI utilization, contribution to learning, and ethical concerns. Data (n = 32) were analyzed, and free-response answers were thematically coded. While 93.8% of respondents found the GAI-generated content to be "very good" or "excellent," 28.1% found inaccuracies, and 68.8% "strongly agreed" or "agreed" that GAI should be allowed to be used as a tool to complete academic assignments. Interestingly, however, only 28.1% "strongly agreed" or "agreed" that GAI may be used for assignments if not explicitly authorized by the instructor. Though GAI allowed for more efficient completion of the project and better understanding of the topic, students noted concerns about academic integrity and the lack of citations in GAI responses. The assignment can easily be modified for different learning preferences and course environments. Raising awareness among students and faculty about the ethical use and limitations of GAI is crucial in today's evolving pedagogical landscape.

DNA detection by agarose gel electrophoresis (AGE) is commonly used in molecular biology. AGE is a separation method that provides opportunities for students to learn about the topology and size of DNA molecules. Recently, several fluorescent dyes have been used for DNA staining owing to their convenience, safety, reduced toxicity, and high sensitivity. A blue light-emitting diode (LED) transilluminator is required to detect DNA using fluorescent dyes; however, the associated high cost may limit its availability in classrooms or small laboratories. Therefore, we have designed a simple, low-cost blue LED illuminator to enable easy assembly for instructors and students. We evaluated the performance of the proposed illuminator by observing fluorescent dye-stained DNA markers using AGE, revealing clear DNA marker bands. Despite its limited functionality, the ease of construction and affordability of the proposed illuminator make it sufficient for hands-on molecular biology training in classrooms, thereby enhancing the learning environment and educational efficiency.