This project proposal was an extension of my 2005 Spring and Fall projects.  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?”  The project was designed to determine whether the use of student designed web tutorials facilitated learning of subject content and online literacy skills.  I wanted to increase the amount of success of the project regarding the use of peer reviewed scientific journal articles, and to try out a tool in hopes of better assessing student content knowledge.  Though students have a high rate of overall success on the project, the continuing challenge is that students have the most difficulty in searching for, reviewing and using peer reviewed scientific journal articles.  This is the component of the project which elevates it to the equivalent of a traditional research paper.

Most importantly, I wanted to be able to review three semesters of results and take a closer look at the trends I have seen so far, and add new assessments to the project.

The project took approximately 6 weeks in the middle part of the course, during a major section on bacterial taxonomy, classification, and disease.  I followed the progress of two sections of Biosci 221; approximately 37 students.  Students were assigned a web tutorial project I call “Make One, Take One”.   Each student picked a different bacterium to research online, had to choose three appropriate websites, and use Proquest to research and include 2 peer reviewed scientific journals on the topic (topics were turned in prior to the complete tutorial for class assessment purposes).  The tutorials included background information on the bacterium, 3 sites/2 articles, 20 questions, and a final 10 question quiz.  When completed the tutorials were turned in to me (with an answer key), and exchanged at random with other students who then took that tutorial—answered the questions, took the quiz, and commented on the quality of the tutorial.  These completed tutorials were turned in to me for final assessment.  The tutorial was in lieu of a traditional research paper and was worth 10% of their final grade. 

One of the biggest changes to the project this semester was that students were also assessed on the content information via a short pre/post project assessment.  All students were given a list of all the bacteria chosen as topics and were asked to list everything they knew about each bacterium.  They were given the same list after completion of the tutorial projects and then again, after a series of lectures covering units on bacterial taxonomy, classification and diseases.

In order to compare the development of online research skills, one section of Biosci 221 received in depth instruction in online research via a library tour and in class instruction, including review of appropriate sites.  The other class did not attend a tour and received only basic instruction/guidance from me.  However, this semester, in an attempt to help students discern peer reviewed scientific research articles from other types of articles, all students were shown examples of a web tutorial and peer reviewed journal articles in class and copies of the articles were available for them in the library.  I surveyed the students regarding if/how the project increased their online literacy skills and use of peer reviewed articles.  Additional questions regarding critical thinking skills was added to the survey.

The tutorial was graded with a rubric and I again based success on the majority earning a “C” or better on the assignment.  In addition, students were assessed for content information on the final exam.

Finally, I have compiled the results of 3 semesters of this research project, which is perhaps the most significant aspect of the project to me.

None

I feel that I have developed and refined a tool for increasing content knowledge, online research skills of scientific articles and information, and critical thinking skills, especially in regard to information about science topics.  One of the most exciting comments I received from a student was regarding something she had read (and believed) in a non-science publication that was actually incorrect according to the actual scientific literature cited.  Once she looked up the cited original research article for her project, she realized that the author had misinterpreted the results of the research.  It was a huge eye-opener for her and gave her the desire to investigate and rely on primary sources for information in the future. 

The results from this semester are similar to previous semesters.  Overall, the students had a huge success rate.  As is previous semesters, greater than 90% of students earned a grade of “C” or higher.  Once again, there is a striking difference between the class that attended the library tour versus the class that did not attend the tour.  Every single measurement, whether it related to increasing online skills or content retention, was higher in the class that attended the tour.  Clearly the action of attending the library tour was significant.  Perhaps the requirement of attending the tour conferred (via the “shadow curriculum”) upon the project a greater sense of importance for those students.  From now on, all students will attend the tour, and I will continue to collect data to observe trends between the classes.

Also again, only a small majority of students in each class felt that their online skills increased.  However, as in past semesters, the library tour class had better success at including and citing correctly peer reviewed journal articles in their tutorials (86% in the tour class; 61% in the no tour class).  A large majority of students stated that the tutorial increased learning, interest, and motivation.

This semester I included two new assessments to the project, and frankly, I wish I had thought to do them all three semesters!  The first was an additional aspect to the survey.  I asked students to assign a value (1=strongly disagree, 2=disagree, 3=neither agree nor disagree, 4=agree, 5=strongly agree) to the following 5 questions:

1.  My ability to analyze peer reviewed journal articles has increased as a result of the web tutorial .______

2.  My ability to think critically about science has increased as a result of the web tutorial project.________

3.  The assignment challenged me to read critically.______

4.  The assignment challenged me to think critically.______

5. The assignment challenged me to write critically.______

Most students agreed with the statements, though did not “strongly agree”.  The results of both classes were very similar, with the biggest difference being that students in the library tour class rated question #1 slightly higher than the no tour class.  I also received many side comments on the survey.  One student stated that they were better able to distinguish between reliable and unreliable science sites.  Another commented that Proquest opened up a whole new world to them.  Of course on the other hand, one student commented that I should get rid of the scholarly journal component.  All in all I have learned that this project is a good introduction to scholarly journals.  However, students still struggle with the use of peer reviewed scientific articles.  The correct usage of them in the tutorial project has remained about the same in the last two semesters and so in the future I will introduce them to more samples earlier in the course as part of their reading material.

The other new assessment for this term was the short pre/post project assessment.  As a pre-project assessment, all students were given a list of all the bacteria chosen by classmates as topics for their web tutorials and were asked to list everything they knew about each bacterium.  The students were actually frustrated with this part of the assessment because they knew very little about each organism.  As a post-project assessment, they were given the same list after completion of the tutorial projects and then once more, after a series of lectures covering units on bacterial taxonomy, classification, and diseases.  I counted the number of correct facts listed each time.  The students were amazed at the amount of information they were able to list after the entire unit in comparison to their first attempt.  The amount of information from the pre-test to the first post-project assessment (after the tutorials) increased by 43% for the tour class, and 39% for the non-tour class.  The amount of information from the pre-test to the second post-project assessment (after tutorials and lectures) increased by 200% for the tour class, and 174% for the non-tour class.  Again, the class the attended the library instruction had higher values.  This is a technique modified from something I used when teaching middle school.  Although it gives me a sense of what students are learning and retaining, its greatest value is in the satisfaction that the students get in seeing on one page their progression in learning content information. 

Over the last 3 semesters I have answered many of the questions I had regarding this project.  The ability to track results for 3 semesters has been invaluable to me and will benefit future students in many ways.  I have learned to streamline and strengthen the project and the rubric for the project.  I have learned the importance of taking students out of the class and to the library for a tour of the resources.  At this point, I could give the tour myself, even in class via the College of the Canyons website, but I am convinced that the actual physical taking of the tour ads some import to it.  Student feedback via survey and assessment has helped me modify this project and improved other activities and lectures in class.  In addition, ideas completely unrelated to this project have surfaced for use in my classes.  I think that students also really appreciate being able to comment on what happens in the classroom and it definitely increases rapport, quality of instruction and the classroom environment.

Many thanks go to the Classroom Research Projects committee for allowing me to pursue this project over successive semesters.