We found 60 results that contain "aan"

Since 2017, the MSU Strategic Communication Online M.A. has been helping working professionals advance their careers with skills the marketplace demands. A tenet of the program has been the fostering of interpersonal engagement, by creating spaces for student-to-student interaction and student-to-staff interaction. Through surveys and interviews with current students, we measure the importance of program engagement for students by tracking the effectiveness of: various communication mediums and tools; and personal touchpoints with classmates and MSU StratCom staff.

To access a PDF of the "The importance of interpersonal engagement in an online master's degree program" poster, click here.
Description of the Poster 
The importance of interpersonal engagement in an online master’s degree program 
 Introduction 
The purpose of this report is to provide the Michigan State University Strategic Communication Online M.A. a summary of students’ perceptions of engagement in the program. This report focuses on the responses of currently enrolled students as of Spring semester 2021. Students voluntarily responded to a survey sent out via email and social media. Additionally, students were given the option to agree to a second phone interview for further insights. The report looks at engagement through students’ connection to each other, to staff and faculty, and facilitated through various tools and media. 
Methodology 
Survey Purpose and Methodology 
To gain an understanding and perspective of students’ views on engagement in the StratCom program a written survey was sent by Daune Rensing, StratCom Student Advisor, via email.  


The email was sent to the MSU email address of students currently enrolled in either the StratCom master’s or certificate program, on March 15, 2021. 


Written reminders were sent March 22 and March 29. 


A video reminder was posted by Jason Archer, StratCom Director, on StratCom’s Student Life, Teams and Facebook pages on March 29. 




The 24-question survey was closed on April 2, extended from the original deadline of March 25. 


Sixty-two responses were received with 2 incomplete surveys, resulting in 60 responses.  


Phone Interview Purpose and Methodology 
To expand the understanding and perspective students views on engagement in the StratCom program, a follow up phone interview was conducted. Forty students responded positively to a question on the survey asking if they would be willing to participate in a follow-up phone interview with a fellow student. 
Limitations 
The limited nature of the data set needs to be taken into consideration when weighing the meaning and significance of the insights reported here. The written surveys were completed by students enrolled anywhere from their first semester to last in the program, which may affect their perceptions of the program. All phone interviews were conducted by one person, which may result in some bias of interpretation. 
Research Questions 
To measure the importance of engagement in the StratCom program, the research questions in the survey and phone interview fell into three categories:  

What tools and resources are important for student engagement in the StratCom program?  
Do students feel the StratCom program is meeting their engagement needs?  
What changes/improvements does the StratCom program need to make to meet students’ expectations? 

Results 
These graphs highlight responses to our first two questions of what students do value and what they don’t value, and that we are meeting their engagement needs. The conclusion, in more detail, addresses ways in which respondents feel StratCom can improve engagement. 
Conclusion 
Overwhelmingly, respondents felt that StratCom was meeting their engagement needs, in terms of tools used and connection to faculty and staff, and that it was an important part of their time in the program. To continue StratCom’s good start, some respondents had suggestions to strengthen their engagement experience even more:

Set expectations for tools and resources 
More student onboarding  
Intentional diversity throughout the program 
Develop stronger bonds with fellow students and instructors 
Standardization in the curriculum 
Use the coursework to develop student-led engagement activities in the program 

Future Work 
Planning for StratCom’s future and creating a sustainable engagement model are themes respondents suggested. For instance, leadership contingency plans, consistency among courses and “keeping their finger on the pulse” of student needs and industry requirements were all important things to consider moving forward. 
  
 

In Fall 2020, the My Spartan Story team launched campus-wide My Spartan Story and the Spartan Experience Record, MSU's new co-curricular record. This session will explore successes and challenges in launching a new initiative during the pandemic, and will also explore introductory data on how we have been able to expand recognition of co-curricular learning and engagement of undergraduate Spartans.To access a PDF of the "Lessons Learned Launching a University-Wide Initiative in a Remote Environment" poster, click here.Description of the Poster
Lessons Learned Launching a Campus-Wide Initiative in a Remote Environment Poster Outline 
Introduction 
My Spartan Story, Michigan State University’s new co-curricular record, planned to launch to undergraduate Spartans and the MSU community in a traditional campus environment for the 2020-2021 academic year. Significant strategy, resources, and collaboration defined a launch that soon became incongruent to the campuses needs pivoting to remote learning. The My Spartan Story Team shifted strategy to solely virtual methods to grow awareness and education of My Spartan Story and the Spartan Experience Record (a new customizable record displaying learning in non-credit bearing experiences that can be requested alongside the transcript through the Registrar’s Office). Several tactics planned had to be eliminated, and communications and programming methods rethought. Thankfully, time spent investing in website updates, resources and guides, and other methods simply became more invaluable.   
Methods 
All 

Email communications sent to faculty, staff, administrators, and undergraduate students co-created with Provost Communications Team. 
Downloadable resources and guides created to assist with workflows and utilization of the My Spartan Story platform. 

Faculty/Staff 

Strategic outreach to campus community, presenting at unit meetings, and large monthly meetings such as Undergraduate Assistant/Associate Deans and Directors of Undergraduate Affairs (UGAAD). 
My Spartan Story Faculty/Staff Workshops held 2-3 times monthly, welcoming organic connection to My Spartan Story. 

Students 

Instagram, Facebook, and Twitter accounts created; posts organized through Hootsuite. Content regularly shared by campus colleagues and students. 
My Spartan Story 101 Workshops offered as well as Registered Student Organization Workshops in partnership with MSU Student Life. 
My Spartan Story Week held in collaboration with platform partners Undergraduate Research and Center for Community Engaged Learning. 
Contests and giveaways promoting engagement with the My Spartan Story platform held throughout the year. 
Regular emails sent to students with a validated position on their Spartan Experience Record. 
Virtual attendance at events such as Sparticipation and Spartan Remix. 

Results 

Within Fall 2020, 87 new positions were submitted for review and inclusion in My Spartan Story, an 89% increase from Fall 2019 (46 positions). 
9% of positions (8) received were represented by two new colleges and one new division that previously did not have any submissions. 
91% of Fall 2020 submissions received from colleges/divisions we had an established relationship through 2019-2020 soft launch. 
The potential number of students who could have a position validated to their Spartan Experience Record increased by 137.5% compared to Fall 2019 (1497 to 3556). 
Increased engagement on social media platforms, with nearly 700 collective followers. 

Successes 

Within Fall 2020, 87 new positions were submitted for review and inclusion in My Spartan Story, an 89% increase from Fall 2019 (46 positions). 
9% of positions (8) received were represented by two new colleges and one new division that previously did not have any submissions. 
91% of Fall 2020 submissions received from colleges/divisions we had an established relationship through 2019-2020 soft launch. 
The potential number of students who could have a position validated to their Spartan Experience Record increased by 137.5% compared to Fall 2019 (1497 to 3556). 
Increased engagement on social media platforms, with nearly 700 collective followers. 

Challenges 

Within Fall 2020, 87 new positions were submitted for review and inclusion in My Spartan Story, an 89% increase from Fall 2019 (46 positions). 
9% of positions (8) received were represented by two new colleges and one new division that previously did not have any submissions. 
91% of Fall 2020 submissions received from colleges/divisions we had an established relationship through 2019-2020 soft launch. 
The potential number of students who could have a position validated to their Spartan Experience Record increased by 137.5% compared to Fall 2019 (1497 to 3556). 
Increased engagement on social media platforms, with nearly 700 collective followers. 

Future Steps 

Within Fall 2020, 87 new positions were submitted for review and inclusion in My Spartan Story, an 89% increase from Fall 2019 (46 positions). 
9% of positions (8) received were represented by two new colleges and one new division that previously did not have any submissions. 
91% of Fall 2020 submissions received from colleges/divisions we had an established relationship through 2019-2020 soft launch. 
The potential number of students who could have a position validated to their Spartan Experience Record increased by 137.5% compared to Fall 2019 (1497 to 3556). 
Increased engagement on social media platforms, with nearly 700 collective followers. 

Figure Descriptions 

Position increase chart 
3,556: Potential students who can have a validated position on their record by end of 2020-2021 academic year from Fall 2020 submissions  
Social media platforms have significantly driven student engagement, specifically tagging students and organizations in posts. 
Colleges & Divisions with Opportunities in My Spartan Story as of Fall 2020 

Associate Provost for Teaching, Learning and Technology 
Associate Provost for Undergraduate Education 
Associate Provost for University Outreach & Engagement 
College of Agriculture & Natural Resources 
College of Arts & Letters 
College of Communication Arts & Sciences 
College of Education 
College of Engineering 
College of Natural Science 
College of Osteopathic Medicine 
College of Social Science 
Division of Residential & Hospitality Services 
Eli Broad College of Business 
Executive Vice President for Administration 
Honors College 
International Studies & Programs 
James Madison College 
Libraries 
Office of Civil Rights & Title IX Education & Compliance 
Provost & Academic Affairs 
Vice President for Research & Graduate Studies 
Vice President for Student Affairs & Services 

The move to online learning in response to COVID-19 brought both challenges and opportunities. An off-campus, flipped section of ANTR 350 has been offered in Grand Rapids during the summer since 2017. When Michigan State University moved to online learning for summer 2020, the class was adapted to a Zoom-based, synchronous model. Students were required to complete online learning modules as preparation for each class. During class, students worked in small groups to complete application activities in Zoom breakout rooms.
Groups were assigned and reconfigured for each unit. The instructor provided recommendations for working effectively in a group and students received feedback after the first and third units regarding their teamwork skills and class performance. Unit exams were two-stage examinations, consisting of an individual exam followed immediately by a group exam. These examinations were timed and proctored over Zoom by faculty and staff.
Students and faculty faced many technological, health, and personal challenges during the semester. However, students demonstrated tremendous resilience and flexibility. Overall, the course was a very positive experience; student performance and SIRS ratings were higher than during previous iterations of the course. The instructor observed improved group work skills, which was mirrored by student feedback. Overall, we were able to retain the flipped approach and emphasis on group work by using Zoom breakout rooms to simulate a collaborative learning environment comparable to that of the in-person experience.

To access a PDF of the "Creating a Collaborative Learning Environment in a Synchronous, Flipped Course" poster, click here.
Description of the Poster
Creating a Collaborative Learning Environment in a Synchronous, Flipped Course 
Ryan Maureen Tubbs, Department of Radiology, Division of Human Anatomy, College of Human Medicine
Alexis Amos, Michigan State University, Psychology Major, Senior 
ANTR 350 Goes Virtual 
ANTR 350, Human Gross Anatomy for Pre-Health Professionalsis an undergraduate course traditionally offered as large, in-person lecture sections on main campus and as a flipped, in-person section in Grand Rapids during summer semesters. 
When Michigan State University moved to online learning for summer 2020, the class was adapted to a Zoom-based, synchronous model. Students were required to complete online learning modules as preparation for each class. During class, students worked in small groups to complete application activities in Zoom breakout rooms. The move to online learning in response to COVID-19 brought both challenges and opportunities in terms of creating a collaborative learning environment.  
An online preparatory assignment was due at start of each class 


Readings interspersed with videos, interactive models, and questions 


Guided by specific learning objectives 


Variable number of questions but each assignment worth 2pts (total 11.2% of grade) 


Image: screenshot of a portion of a Top Hat Assignment titled "Preparatory Reading June 9". Some of the learning objectives and headings are shown. 
During class, students primarily collaborated in Zoom breakout rooms to review and apply the content covered in the preparatory assignment. The instructor moved between rooms to check on group progress and answer questions. Most in-class activities utilized Google docs or Top Hat, so the instructor could also observe group progress in real time. For most activities, keys were available during class so that groups did not end up stuck on any questions.  
10:00-10:03 Application prompt while people logged in, answers entered in zoom chat 
10:04-10:15 Synchronous, Top Hat-based Readiness Quiz, 5 questions 
10:15-11:45 Groupwork and mini-lectures* 
11:45-11:50 Post-class survey soliciting feedback on activities & overall session
Image: screenshot of example application exercise using Google Docs. A CT is shown on the right side of the image and a series of questions is shown on the left. Students answers to the questions are shown in blue. 
Creating a Collaborative Learning Environment 
The importance of developing teamwork skills was emphasized in the syllabus and during the course overview presentation. Students were given descriptions of five different group roles (leader, learner, time-keeper, recorder, and summarizer) and asked to try moving between the roles. Students were asked to read and agree to expectations for student interactions, including keeping camera on when possible, actively engaging with the group, agreeing not to take screenshots or record the session, and guidelines about private chats. The instructor acknowledged the awkwardness of working with strangers over zoom and asked all students to be generous of spirit with each other.  
A brief ice-breaker activity was assigned at the start of each unit to give students an opportunity to develop their collaborative learning relationships. After each unit, students were asked to give honest feedback to the instructor about each of their groupmates’ collaborative learning skills. Students received feedback summaries and recommendations about how to improve their collaborative skills at the end of units 1 and 3. Groups were also asked to set ground rules and group goals at the start of units 2 and 3. 
Image: screenshot of June 9 Top Hat In-Class Page. Activity 1 is an ice breaker for new groups. Activity 2 is an axial muscles google doc groupwork exercise. Activity 3 is the review of that google doc as a whole class and Activity 4 is setting Unit 2 goals. 
The importance of collaborative learning was emphasized by the inclusion of collaborative testing. Unit exams consisted of an individual exam followed immediately by the same exam taken in their groups. The group exam contributed 16.67% to each unit exam score.  
Student feedback was collected in SIRS, post-class, and post-course surveys 
Student Feedback 
Image: bar chart showing responses to "How many of your classmates that you did not know previously did you communicate with outside of class during the semester?" 


Fall 2019 (in-person section): Average of 1.3125 


Spring 2020 (Fall 2019 (in-person section until COVID moved asynchronous): Average of 1.2181 


Summer 2020 (sychronous zoom) 1.5625 


Fall 2020 (asynchronous online) 0.8082 


Image: bar chart showing response to "Overall, did you have someone you could reach out to if you struggled with content during this course?" 
Fall 2019 (in-person):  
Yes for all units 79.2% 
Yes, for 3 or 4 units 0% 
Yes, for 1 or two units 12.5% 
No, I never really did 8.3% 
Spring 2020 (mostly in-person) 
Yes for all units 67.3% 
Yes, for 3 or 4 units 5.4% 
Yes, for 1 or two units 16.3% 
No, I never really did 10.9% 
Summer 2020 (synchronous, virtual) 
Yes for all units 81.3% 
Yes, for 3 or 4 units 0% 
Yes, for 1 or two units 6.2% 
No, I never really did 12.5% 
Fall 2020 (asychronous, virtual) 
Yes for all units 60.8% 
Yes, for 3 or 4 units 5.4% 
Yes, for 1 or two units 14.9% 
No, I never really did 18.9% 
Spring 2021 (asychronous, current course) 
Yes for all units 54.7% 
Yes, for 3 or 4 units 4.7% 
Yes, for 1 or two units 16.1% 
No, I never really did 24.5% 
Image: 100% Stacked Column Chart showing student responses to "How comfortable did you feel reaching out to a  course instructor if you struggled with content?" 
Fall 2019 
Extremely Comfortable 54% 
Somewhat comfortable 29% 
Neither comfortable nor uncomfortable 8% 
Somewhat uncomfortable 4% 
Extremely uncomfortable 4% 
Spring 2020 
Extremely Comfortable 36% 
Somewhat comfortable 29% 
Neither comfortable nor uncomfortable 20% 
Somewhat uncomfortable 15% 
Extremely uncomfortable 0% 
Summer 2020  
Extremely Comfortable 87% 
Somewhat comfortable 0% 
Neither comfortable nor uncomfortable 13% 
Somewhat uncomfortable 0% 
Extremely uncomfortable 0% 
Fall 2020  
Extremely Comfortable 39% 
Somewhat comfortable 32% 
Neither comfortable nor uncomfortable 18% 
Somewhat uncomfortable 8% 
Extremely uncomfortable 3% 
Spring 2021  
Extremely Comfortable 35% 
Somewhat comfortable 30% 
Neither comfortable nor uncomfortable 30% 
Somewhat uncomfortable 4% 
Extremely uncomfortable 2% 
Image: Pie Chart Titled "Overall, how supported did you feel during this course compared to other courses you have taken?” (Summer 2020) 
Far above average is shown as 81%, Somewhat above average is shown as 13%, Average is shown as 6%. Somewhat below average and far below average are listed in the legend but not represented in the chart as they are 0% 
Conclusions 
Summer 2020 was a hard semester for everyone. We all faced many technological, health, and personal challenges during the semester. Despite these challenges, students demonstrated tremendous resilience and we were able to create a collaborative learning environment using Zoom breakout rooms. Overall, the course was a very positive experience; student performance and SIRS ratings were higher than during previous Summer iterations of the course. In addition, students felt more connected compared to the asynchronous Fall sections. 
Image: Table “Student Performance” 
Number of students enrolled in course:  
Summer 2019: 22 
Spring 2020: 338 
Summer 2020: 52 
Number of students withdrawn from course: 
Summer 2019: 0 
Spring 2020: 1 
Summer 2020: 0 
Mean percent score overall: 
Summer 2019: 82.85% 
Spring 2020: 90.19% 
Summer 2020: 89.03% 
Number of students with passing scores (2.0 or higher): 
Summer 2019: 20 
Spring 2020: 332 
Summer 2020: 50 
Number of students with failing scores (1.5 of lower): 
Summer 2019: 2 
Spring 2020: 4 
Summer 2020: 2 
Percentage of students with failing scores: 
Summer 2019: 9% 
Spring 2020: 1% 
Summer 2020: 3.8% 
Image: Results of MSU Student Instructional Rating System (SIRS)  
Summer 2019 SIRS 
Course Organization 
Superior 33.3% 
Above Average 55.5% 
Average 11.1% 
Below Average 0% 
Inferior 0% 
Adequacy of the outlined direction of the course 
Superior 33.3% 
Above Average 55.5% 
Average 11.1% 
Below Average 0% 
Inferior 0% 
Your general enjoyment of the course 
Superior 33.3% 
Above Average 44.4% 
Average 22.2% 
Below Average 0% 
Inferior 0% 
Summer 2020 SIRS 
Course Organization 
Superior 70.9% 
Above Average 19.3% 
Average 6.45% 
Below Average 3.22% 
Inferior 0% 
Adequacy of the outlined direction of the course 
Superior 77.4% 
Above Average 16.1% 
Average 6.45% 
Below Average 0% 
Inferior 0% 
Your general enjoyment of the course 
Superior 54.8% 
Above Average 38.7% 
Average 6.45% 
Below Average 0% 
Inferior 0% 
References 
Gaillard, Frank. “Acute Maxillary Sinusitis: Radiology Case.” Radiopaedia Blog RSS, radiopaedia.org/cases/acute-maxillary-sinusitis?lang=us.  
ANTR 350 Top Hat Course. www.tophat.com  
Acknowledgments  
A giant thank you to the ANTR 350 Summer Class of 2020!  
 
 

Welcome to the #iteachmsu Commons! We’re excited you’ve joined us here and want to make sure you feel comfortable with the basic ways you can engage in this space; because after all, engagement is what it’s all about!
Here are five easy ways to get started on iteach.msu.edu!
Log-in
Iteach.msu.edu is a website that is publicly accessible, so anyone can visit to consume content. The opportunities grow exponentially if you’re affiliated with Michigan State University. By clicking the “Log In” button in the upper right corner of the home screen, you can enter your MSU netID (the same information you’d use for your Spartan Mail or EBS) and be logged in as an active user. Logging in is a great first step that opens a lot of #iteachmsu doors! 

Profile
For example, after logging in, you can click on the arrow next to your name in the upper right corner and select “Profile”. Here you can add some basic information about yourself, your role, and your interests/areas of expertise (this helps the site search connect others with you based on keywords). 

Join the Conversation
Once logged in, you can also engage with content shared in the space… You could comment on a post in the feed or on an article you find interesting by writing a response in the text box and clicking the green “comment” button. (You can also reply to comments made by others. Iteach.msu.edu is the space for educator conversations!) 

Share
Do you have a question you’d like to pose to the broader MSU community of educators? Maybe you’re facing a particular challenge, or you have an idea of an activity but aren’t sure how to put it into action. You can share content like this, plus upload artifacts like PDFs, via “posts”! If you have longer reflections or insights you’d like to share, an “article” gives you more formatting options in addition to the ability to embed photos and videos!


Connect
If you’re looking to connect with other educators who share a common interest as you, join a group! Groups function as informal learning communities or communities of practice, with the same functions as the broader site. You can engage in a discussion on a post in the group feed, share articles, and “connect” with other members! (By clicking the “connect” button on a user’s profile or the connections page, you can send the direct messages.)

Bonus: Thank an Educator
Clicking “Thank an Educator” in the left navigation bar will take you to a page with a short survey where you can submit an MSU educator for recognition from #iteachmsu. Who have you noticed stepping up? Who has made a positive impact on your MSU experience? Anyone can be thanked via this initiative, so start celebrating others today! Learn more about Thank an Educator here. 
 
The #iteachmsu Commons is a space “for educators, by educators”. But what does that mean? Please read more about the history of this platform on Medium here. 

Formative assessments can provide crucial data to help instructors evaluate pedagogical effectiveness and address students' learning needs. The shift to online instruction and learning in the past year emphasized the need for innovative ways to administer assessments that support student learning and success. Faculty often use multiple-choice (MC) assessments due to ease of use, time and other resource constraints. While grading these assessments can be quick, the closed-ended nature of the questions often does not align with real scientific practices and can limit the instructor's ability to evaluate the heterogeneity of student thinking. Students often have mixed understanding that include scientific and non-scientific ideas. Open-ended or Constructed Response (CR) assessment questions, which allow students to construct scientific explanations in their own words, have the potential to reveal student thinking in a way MC questions do not. The results of such assessments can help instructors make decisions about effective pedagogical content and approaches. We present a case study of how results from administration of a CR question via a free-to-use constructed response classifier (CRC) assessment tool led to changes in classroom instruction. The question was used in an introductory biology course and focuses on genetic information flow. Results from the CRC assessment tool revealed unexpected information about student thinking, including naïve ideas. For example, a significant fraction of students initially demonstrated mixed understanding of the process of DNA replication. We will highlight how these results influenced change in pedagogy and content, and as a result improved student understanding.To access a PDF of the "Automated analyses of written responses reveal student thinking in STEM" poster, click here.Description of the Poster 
Automated analyses of written responses reveal student thinking in STEM 
Jenifer N. Saldanha, Juli D. Uhl, Mark Urban-Lurain, Kevin Haudek 
Automated Analysis of Constructed Response (AACR) research group 
CREATE for STEM Institute, Michigan State University 
Email: jenifers@msu.edu 
Website: beyondmultiplechoice.org  
QR code (for website):  
 
Key highlights: 

Constructed Response (CR) questions allow students to explain scientific concepts in their own words and reveal student thinking better than multiple choice questions. 


The Constructed Response Classifier (CRC) Tool (free to use: beyondmultiplechoice.org) can be used to assess student learning gains 

In an introductory biology classroom: 

Analyses by the CRC tool revealed gaps in student understanding and non-normative ideas. 
The instructor incorporated short term pedagogical changes and recorded some positive outcomes on a summative assessment. 
Additional pedagogical changes incorporated the next semester led to even more positive outcomes related to student learning (this semester included the pivot to online instruction). 

The results from this case study highlight the effectiveness of using data from the CRC tool to address student thinking and develop targeted instructional efforts to guide students towards a better understanding of complex biological concepts.   
Constructed Response Questions as Formative Assessments 

Formative assessments allow instructors to explore nuances of student thinking and evaluate student performance.  
Student understanding often includes scientific and non-scientific ideas [1,2].  


Constructed Response (CR) questions allow students to explain scientific concepts in their own words and reveal student thinking better than multiple choice questions [3,4]. 

Constructed Response Classifier (CRC) tool 

A formative assessment tool that automatically predicts ratings of student explanations.  
This Constructed Response Classifier (CRC) tool generates a report that includes: 


categorization of student ideas from writing related to conceptual understanding. 
web diagrams depicting the frequency and co-occurrence rates of the most used ideas and relevant terms. 

CRC Questions in the Introductory Biology Classroom :  
A Case study 
Students were taught about DNA replication and the central dogma of Biology. 
Question was administered as online homework, completion credit provided. Responses collected were analyzed by the CRC tool. 
CRC question: 
The following DNA sequence occurs near the middle of the coding region of a gene.  DNA   5'  A A T G A A T G G* G A G C C T G A A G G A  3'     
There is a G to A base change at the position marked with an asterisk. Consequently, a codon normally encoding an amino acid becomes a stop codon.  How will this alteration influence DNA replication? 

Part 1 of the CRC question used to detect student confusion between the central dogma processes.  
Related to the Vision & Change core concept 3 “Information Flow, Exchange, and Storage" [5], adapted from the Genetics Concept Assessment [6,7]. 

Insight on Instructional Efficacy from CRC Tool 
Table 1: Report score summary revealed that only a small fraction of students provided correct responses post instruction. (N = 48 students). 




Student responses 


Spring 2019 




Incorrect 


45% 




Incomplete/Irrelevant 


32% 




Correct 


23% 




 
Sample incorrect responses:  
Though both incorrect, the first response below demonstrates understanding of a type of mutation and the second one uses the context of gene expression. 

“This is a nonsense mutation and will end the DNA replication process prematurely leaving a shorter DNA strand” (spellchecked) 


“It will stop the DNA replication… This mutation will cause a gene to not be expressed” 

CRC report provided: 

Response score summaries 
Web diagrams of important terms 
Term usage and association maps 

The instructor Identified scientific and non-scientific ideas in student thinking  
This led to: 
Short term pedagogical changes, same semester  

During end of semester material review, incorporated: 


Small group discussions about the central dogma.  
Discussions about differences between DNA replication, and transcription and translation. 


Worksheets with questions on transcribing and translating sequences. 

Figure one: 
The figure depicts an improvement in student performance observed in the final summative assessment.  
Percentage of students who scored more than 95% on a related question: 
In the unit exam = 71% 
Final summative exam = 79% 
Pedagogical Changes Incorporated in the Subsequent Semester 
CR questions: 

Explain the central dogma. 


List similarities and differences between the processes involved. 
Facilitated small group discussions for students to explain their responses. 

 
Worksheets and homework:  
Transcribe and translate DNA sequences, including ones with deletions/additions.  
Students encouraged to create their own sequences for practice.  
Revisited DNA replication via clicker questions and discussions, while students were learning about transcription and translation. 
Table 2: 68% of students in the new cohort provided correct responses to the CRC question post instruction. (N = 47 students). 




Student Responses 


Spring 2020 




Incorrect 


19% 




Incomplete/Irrelevant 


13% 




Correct 


68% 




Conclusions 
The results from this case study highlight the effectiveness of using data from the CRC tool to address student thinking and develop targeted instructional efforts to guide students towards a better understanding of complex biological concepts.   
Future Directions 

Use the analytic rubric feature in the CRC tool to obtain further insight into normative and non-normative student thinking. 
Use the clicker-based case study available at CourseSource about the processes in the central dogma [8]. 


Incorporate additional CRC tool questions in each course unit. 

Questions currently available in a variety of disciplines: 
Biology, Biochemistry, Chemistry, Physiology, and Statistics 
Visit our website beyondmultiplechoice.org and sign up for a free account 
References: 

Ha, M., Nehm, R. H., Urban-Lurain, M., & Merrill, J. E. (2011).  CBE—Life Sciences Education, 10(4), 379-393. 


Sripathi, K. N., Moscarella, R. A., et al., (2019). CBE—Life Sciences Education, 18(3), ar37. 


Hubbard, J. K., Potts, M. A., & Couch, B. A. (2017). CBE—Life Sciences Education, 16(2), ar26. 


Birenbaum, M., & Tatsuoka, K. K. (1987). Applied Psychological Measurement, 11(4), 385-395. 


 "Vision and change in undergraduate biology education: a call to action." American Association for the Advancement of Science, Washington, DC (2011). 


Smith, M. K., Wood, W. B., & Knight, J. K. (2008). CBE—Life Sciences Education, 7(4), 422-430. 


Prevost, L. B., Smith, M. K., & Knight, J. K. (2016). CBE—Life Sciences Education, 15(4), ar65. 


Pelletreau, K. N., Andrews, T., Armstrong, N., et al., (2016). CourseSource. 

Acknowledgments.  
This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation (DUE grant 1323162). 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 supporting agencies. 

D2L, MSU's learning management system, includes access to Ally, which is an accessibility tool that benefits both students and instructors. It provides alternative file types for students and suggestions on how to improve accessibility to instructors.The infographic below provides an overview of how instructors can benefit from Ally. This Canva link is to an accessible format of the infographic and includes links to useful resources. 

How many times have you been on campus at MSU - using a restroom, walking by a bulletin board in a hallway, waiting for an elevator - and saw a flyer or poster for an upcoming event. "Ooo, that sounds super interesting!" You scan the printed sheet of paper for details. "Bummer! I missed it." I have been at MSU in a variety of capacities since 2008 and I cannot count the number of times this has happened to me. If I happened to walk through a building that was outside my usual route and see a program or event of interest, it usually had already passed. Once I began my work in educational development, alongside with my doctoral studies in HALE, this became increasingly frusterating. I saw really cool topics, relevant across disciplines, being offered to limited groups - or even worse, being open to all MSU educators but not being promoted broadly. I was missing out so I knew others were as well. So when I saw the #iteachmsu Commons Educator Events Calendar, I was super excited. There is now a common calendar that, just like all of the #iteachmsu Commons, is for educators by educators. Anyone with MSU credentials can log in to iteach.msu.edu and share an event on the calendar. From unit, college, or organization-sponsored programs like educator trainings and workshops, to individual initatives like communities of practice, coworks, or meet-ups, any scheduled activity with an intended/open audience of folx who support the teaching and learning, student succes, and/or outreach mission of the university can be shared here!
      
From a self-proclaimed lifelong learner, I'm really excited to have a "one stop shop" where I can determine MSU personal growth and professional development activities, but as an educator at the Center for Teaching and Learning Innovation I am also thrilled about some of the ways the new #iteachmsu site functionality supports program facilitators. The "Going" button on an event details page can be linked directly to your event's registration. You can upload supporting materials or pre-activity details. There are easy ways to designate both face-to-face and virtual events. There's even a discussion thread for comments on each event!            If you have events that support MSU educators, start sharing them on the #iteachmsu Events Calendar today!Article cover photo by Windows on Unsplash

This week, we are featuring Norman Scheel, a Research Associate in MSU’s Department of Radiology Cognitive Imaging Research Center. Norman was recognized via iteach.msu.edu's Thank and Educator Initiative! We encourage MSU community members to nominate high-impact Spartan educators (via our Thank an Educator form) regularly!
Read more about Norman’s perspectives below. #iteachmsu's questions are bolded below, followed by their responses!

You were recognized via the Thank an Educator Initiative. In one word, what does being an educator mean to you? Share with me what this word/quality looks like in your practice? (Have your ideas on this changed over time? If so, how?) 
The word would be “rewarding”. For me, teaching and learning is a two-way street and no matter in which direction you are driving, it is always an investment in the future and there is always traffic in both ways. Above all, I want to set up my students for success. As a teacher, I see myself as a conductor to help my students achieve their personal goals and as a role model who possibly has a substantial influence on the future of my students. So, seeing my students excel is highly rewarding, but I am also learning so much from my students, every day, which is also immensely rewarding.
Tell me more about your educational “setting.” This can include, but not limited to departmental affiliations, community connections, co-instructors, and students. (AKA, where do you work?)
I am now in the final stages of my postdoc in the Radiology Department of Michigan State University and am currently applying for Assistant Professor positions. Together with Prof. David Zhu I supervise and mentor the graduate students in our lab as well as students that rotate through it. I also mentor and advise students remotely for their bachelor’s and master's theses at my home University of Lübeck, Germany where I did my Ph.D. in Computer Science and Computational Neuroscience. In my research, I work interdisciplinary with many different universities, e. g. Vanderbilt University, University of Texas, John Hopkins University, or the Max Planck Institute Tübingen, Germany, on a variety of research questions. With my collaborators at these institutions, there are always students working on joint projects where it is natural to mutually teach skills important for the project’s success but also in the personal interest of the students.
What is a challenge you experience in your educator role? Any particular “solutions” or “best practices” you’ve found that help you support student success at the university despite/in the face of this?
My German Diploma in Informatics taught me the importance of multidimensional learning, or as Aristotle said, “the whole is greater than the sum of its parts”. Over the last few years, I saw a trend that students are taught highly specific topics, without relating these to a “grand scheme”. Integrating information from multiple perspectives gives cross-references to other related topics and courses. This integration facilitates the ability to abstract learned information and helps to apply it in a more holistic way of connecting “the bigger picture”. For clarity, the content in my lectures is presented in a way that is illustrative rather than abstract, so that students are able to grasp the content and put it into relation to what they have learned before. I always try to highlight cross-references as much as possible, so that students see past the boundaries of final exams.
What are practices you utilize that help you feel successful as an educator?
The most important I think is to find a way to effectively communicate. As my teaching is typically in a small group or individual setting, I am able to tailor my teaching directly to the needs of my students. This helps tremendously in finding ways to communicate expectations between my students and me. 
What topics or ideas about teaching and learning would you like to see discussed on the iteach.msu.edu platform? Why do you think this conversation is needed at MSU? 
It would be amazing to have a central place on the platform, where educators could advertise potential master’s or bachelor’s theses, or rotation projects, or vice versa, students could advertise that they are on the look-out for these projects, with a few skills that they have, to see if there might be a fit. In my time here at MSU, it has been very difficult to find mid-level academic hands, especially interdisciplinary ones. The lack of or at least problematic communication between different parts of the University makes local collaboration very difficult.
What are you looking forward to (or excited to be a part of) next semester?
I am excited for a few of my students to get the chance to present at scientific conferences. It is always such a rewarding experience and always such a big push for motivation and new ideas.


Don't forget to celebrate individuals you see making a difference in teaching, learning, or student success at MSU with #iteachmsu's Thank an Educator initiative. You might just see them appear in the next feature!