We found 235 results that contain "open textbooks"

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. 

This week, we are featuring Ken Szymusiak, Managing Director – Academic Programs, within the Burgess Institute for Entrepreneurship & Innovation at MSU. Ken 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 initiative) regularly!
Read more about Ken’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?  
Trust 
Share with me what this word/quality looks like in your practice?
I feel like students have entrusted me with their time and I want to make sure they leave my classroom feeling that they gained something useful for the adventures that lie ahead.
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 have a really unique setting. Although my home base for teaching is within the Management department in the Broad College of Business my classes are open campus wide. One of the hallmark qualities of the Burgess Institute’s programming is that it is open to all students from the Minor in Entrepreneurship & Innovation, to our New Venture Creation Programs, to our Innovate Speaker series, and many more. Entrepreneurship and innovation thrive on diversity and creativity and I love that MSU has fully embraced this mission.
What is a challenge you experience in your educator role?
I think the biggest challenge as an educator is empowering students to participate in the path the class takes. The best learning happens when students feel like they are co-creating and not just being “lectured to.”
Any particular “solutions” or “best practices” you’ve found that help you support student success at the university despite/in the face of this? 
I think the key to unlocking student engagement is really getting to know what their interests are and trying to provide them with relevant and realistic examples of how the material is being applied in fields that really excite them.
What are practices you utilize that help you feel successful as an educator?
I don’t know if I have any particular practices, but I really love when students reach out after they had my class for more information or resources which show genuine curiosity. I also really enjoy it when students refer a friend to take one of my classes…there’s no greater compliment.
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?
I think we have a unique opportunity with the current generation of students to reimagine the value of higher education. I get a sense that there is quite a bit of anxiousness and cynicism amongst this group of students. I think it should be our mission to transform the college experience so that every student feels as if they truly get their monies worth regardless of major. I think all ideas should be on the table to reimagine the college experience.
What are you looking forward to (or excited to be a part of) next semester?
Seeing people...haha
But in all seriousness, I think the big lesson from 2020 was not to take anything for granted. I wonder if this will affect how we engage with students and how they engage with us. I’m most curious to see if there are any cultural changes on this front

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! Follow the MSU Hub Twitter account to see other great content from the #iteachmsu Commons as well as educators featured every week during #ThankfulThursdays.

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.