My classroom research project continued to concentrate on the general question, “Does the creating, exchanging, and taking of web tutorials increase content knowledge, quality of work, and online literacy skills in my Biosci 221 Microbiology classes?”  I wanted to continue to observe whether the use of student designed web tutorials facilitates learning of subject content and online literacy skills.  From my Spring 2005 project results, I think the assignment does increase content knowledge, reinforce information from the lecture and text, increase the skills of students who might not be familiar with online research, and helps students develop critical assessment skills for online information.  In the previous semester’s project I did find that the tutorial was a positive learning tool and I wanted to gather more data and refine the project.

The project took about 5 weeks in the middle part of the course during a major section on bacterial taxonomy, diagnostics, and disease.  I followed the progress of two sections of Biosci 221; approximately 41 students.  At the beginning of this part of the course the students were assigned a web tutorial project called “Make One, Take One”.   The students picked a topic (biology of a particular bacteria, this is a more narrow topic than last term) to research online.  They chose three appropriate websites and used Proquest to research and include 2 peer reviewed scientific journals.  The tutorials included background information on the topic, 3 sites/2 articles, 20 questions, and a final 10 question quiz.  When completed they were turned in to me (with an answer key), and exchanged at random with other students who then took the tutorial—answered the questions and took the quiz. These completed tutorials were turned in to me for final assessment.  The tutorial was in lieu of a traditional research paper and wass worth 10% of their final grade. 

One section of Biosci 221 received in depth instruction in online research via a library tour and me, including review of appropriate sites.  The other class did not attend a tour and received instruction from me only.  The Tutorial project was graded according a rubric.  I measured success of the project based on a majority of the students earning a grade of “C” or higher on the project.  Content knowledge was assessed on the final exam.  At the end of the term I surveyed the students regarding if/how the project increased their online literacy skills, and asked additional questions not included in last semester’s project.  I also tried to posit questions that required more than a yes/no answer.

Lastly, I compared the results of last spring to this current project.

None

*  89% had at least one peer reviewed article.
**78% had at least one peer reviewed article.

The average grades were similar to last spring, with the class who took the library tour having a higher overall class average.  The same trend is true for the % of grades of "C" or better.  So the success rate on this project is high.  I have learned that the students take a lot of pride in their projects and in their success.  It is great to have a project that they enjoy and can be successful on.  Most students also stated that they preferred this type of project over a traditional research paper; a few commented that this was because they were able to learn about two topics instead of just one.  Although there is no comparison with a traditional project, I think that the student's do gain as much, if not more, from the web tutorial over a traditional paper.  Overall, most students feel that the project did increase their interest in similar topics in the class and gave specific instances.  The "no tour" class this fall by and large did not feel that the project increased their interest in other topics. Students also felt more motivated to put together a quality project because a peer was going to take the tutorial.  Two students commented that they could be the teacher as well as the student in this project.  I think those statements speak volumes.  These students project confidence, pride, and a level of excitement in the work.  In addition, as we all know, thinking about how to teach someone something really cements information and increases creativity and critical thinking.

Now for the surprises; again this term most students said that they did not learn new online skills.  Though some added "except for using Proquest"!  So, I do believe that some of their skills were improved upon.  Most students included at least one peer reviewed journal article.  However, the percentage in the "Tour" class was lower than last term, and the "No tour" class was higher.  It may be that I relied more on the tour for instruction this fall in that class, and improved my instruction in the other class.  But, at the end of the term 72% of the "Tour" class was able to define just what a peer reviewed article is, while only 9% of the "No tour" class was able to do so.  So while there was some additional success this term, clearly that aspect of the project needs improved instruction.  That particular question was not asked in the spring term, but will be asked again in the next term. 

My favorite part of this project is following students as they sift through information and make choices about what sites and articles to include and what types of questions they design in their tutorials.  These are important critical thinking skills; I am confident that this tutorial stretches them intellectually and improves those skills.