Dr. Patricia Shields

College of Chemical and Life Sciences
2116 Microbiology

College Park, MD20742

Dear Dr. Shields:

We are pleased to present you with our final proposal for the implementation of a laboratory component for the course Principles of Genetics (BSCI222) currently offered by the University of Maryland’s College of Chemical and Life Sciences. The lack of a laboratory component in this course is a serious academic disadvantage for the students taking the course and reflects poorly on the University.

There were several components to our research. We first studied the ineffectiveness of the current discussion sections by interviewing University of Maryland biology majors who have completed the course. We then studied the benefits of laboratory exercises by reviewing scholarly articles and interviewing biology professors and biology majors from other highly ranked universities. The enclosed proposal includes an analysis of our literature review, an analysis of our interviews with students and professors, and a description of a set of experiments that correspond to material taught in Principles of Genetics and are appropriate for a laboratory component for this course

We will be glad to answer any questions you may have or to further explain our analysis and proposed solutions. Please feel free to contact us via email at or . Thank you very much for your time.

Sincerely,

Attachments: Proposal

Proposal for the Implementation of a Laboratory Component for Principles of Genetics

Table of Contents

Executive Summary

Introduction

Methodology

Results and Findings

Recommendations

Conclusion

Works Cited

Tables and Figures

Table 1. Chi-Square Table

Figure 1. Lac Operon DNA Sequence

Figure 2. Electrophoresis

Figure 3. pGLO Plasmid

Interview Transcripts

Professors at Other Universities

Professors at the University of Maryland

Students at Other Universities

Students at the University of Maryland

Glossary

Executive Summary

The course “Principles of Genetics” (BSCI222) at the University of Maryland currently has no laboratory section incorporated into it. This leads to many problems for students majoring in biology at the university, including difficulty in grasping difficult course concepts and lack of preparation for further courses and the career field. Also, the current discussion section included in the course does not effectively utilize time, leading to frustration for students.

To address this problem, we reviewed scientific literature to gain insight into how laboratory experiences assist undergraduate students. Additionally, we conducted interviews with students and professors from this and other universities to gather further evidence for our claim. Overall, we found that both professors and undergraduate students share an enthusiasm for the opportunity to perform engaging laboratory exercises. Furthermore, experts in the field agree that hands-on experience is essential to the undergraduate experience and benefits multiple groups of individuals, including graduate teaching assistants.

After compiling all of our data, we are recommending that a three-hour laboratory section replace the current discussion section of “Principles of Genetics.” We have also compiled seven experiments which we feel best incorporate material presented in the lecture component of the course and allow students to incorporate investigative design into their learning experience. These experiments highlight what we feel are some of the most difficult concepts to understand in “Principles of Genetics.” Additionally, they incorporate the most effective aspects of the current discussion section. Finally, the experiments will make use of resources to which the Department of Biology at the university currently has access, which would make the transition in course structure a smooth one.

Introduction

The report presents an in-depth look at the problems associated with the current structure of the course “Principle of Genetics” (BSCI222) at the University of Maryland. Specifically, we investigated how the lack of a laboratory is unfavorable to the design of the course.

The Biological Sciences Program at the University of Maryland has five specializations – General Biology (GENB), Cell Biology and Molecular Genetics (CBMG), Ecology and Evolution (ECEV), Microbiology (MICB), and Neurobiology and Physiology (PHNB). Before taking courses in their chosen field, all students in the major must take several courses which constitute a basic program. The four biology courses included in the basic program are “Principles of Biology” I-III (BSCI105, BSCI106, BSCI207, respectively), and “Principles of Genetics.” “Principles of Biology” I and II are both four credit courses that include laboratory sections, while “Principles of Biology” III is a three credit lecture with no laboratory or discussion section included. “Principles of Genetics” consists of a three credit lecture and a one credit discussion section that meets once a week for two hours.

The lack of an introductory genetics laboratory is a current problem at the University of Maryland. In “Principles of Biology” I and II, laboratories are used to enhance students learning by giving them hands-on experiences. In laboratory, students perform experiments and use the knowledge gained from lecture to explain the results they observe, giving them a better understanding and a chance to visualize what they have learned. Not having a laboratory limits students' opportunities to supplement information from lectures with hands-on experiences. This could potentially hinder some students' ability to integrate the abstract concepts taught in the course.

In the Biological Sciences basic program, there are limited opportunities for undergraduate students to learn the essential laboratory techniques necessary to succeed in upper level courses. Several students who enter the program each year place out of “Principles of Biology” I and II by taking the Advanced Placement Exam in Biology. These students miss out on the chance to complete the laboratory exercises associated with these courses. In these introductory labs, basic techniques are taught, including some that are used in genetic research. In the current curriculum, the next required laboratory course is “Cell Biology and Physiology” (BSCI 330), an upper level course. Therefore, each semester some students begin taking upper level classes without having any exposure to rudimentary laboratory techniques.

Additionally, there are limited opportunities for students wishing to gain experience in a genetics laboratory at the University of Maryland. University of Maryland currently offers two advanced courses that teach genetic laboratory techniques – “Recombinant DNA Laboratory” (BSCI414) and “Molecular Genetics Laboratory” (BSCI415). However, these options are both highly specialized three credit electives, and Biology majors are not required to take either course. Also, these courses are offered only in the fall semester, which makes it difficult for students to fit them into their schedules. Consequently, many biology majors graduate from the University of Maryland without ever having experience in a genetics laboratory.

In addition to withholding valuable experience from students, the lack of a laboratory section with “Principles of Genetics” puts University of Maryland students at a disadvantage when applying for position in the field. Genetics is currently a very competitive field due to recent advances and new technological developments. Because employers are looking for candidates with the most experience, Maryland graduates are less qualified than graduates from other schools when applying for jobs and positions at graduate and professional schools. Research into other schools’ curriculums reveals that other highly ranked universities require laboratory components for their introductory genetics courses. U.S. News and World Report provides yearly rankings of the United States top universities. The University of Maryland is ranked fifty-fourth for 2008 (Morse). Schools that we investigated that ranked higher than Maryland include CornellUniversity (ranked twelfth) and the University of Virginia (ranked twenty third). Both of these universities offer their biology majors an introductory sequence that includes a genetics lecture and laboratory (Castrodale; Goldberg). Tied with University of Maryland at fifty-fourth is PepperdineUniversity, which also includes a required laboratory in its introductory genetics course ("Natural Sciences Division"). This highlights the fact that University of Maryland students are not as well prepared for the scientific workforce as their peers who attend other top national universities.

The final component of the problem is the current discussion section that is included with “Principles of Genetics.” The discussion section is not as advantageous to the students in the course as the alternative option of a laboratory. Unlike laboratory exercises, which require students to actively engage in the learning process, the benefits of the discussion depends heavily on the personal preparation of each individual student. If a students chooses not to complete optional homework problems or prepare questions for their teaching assistant, it is likely that he or she will not gain additional knowledge from the time spent in discussion. Also, the discussion for “Principle of Genetics” is one of the few at the University of Maryland which allots one hundred and ten minutes of class time as opposed to the typical fifty minute period. Most of this time is devoted to student questions. Again, if students do not come to discussion with questions, there will not be enough material prepared to fill up the two hours and the time will not be effectively used.

Clearly the lack of a laboratory component for “Principles of Genetics” is a serious issue that needs to be addressed. In the following sections, we will explain our research methods, discuss our findings, and provide recommendations on how to solve the problem.

Methodology

To address the necessity of adding a laboratory component to, we needed to gather evidence to support our claim. This was accomplished by reviewing scientific literature pertaining to the benefits of having laboratory experience and conducting interviews with experts in the field of biology and students majoring in biology.

When beginning our research process, the first step was to see what experts in the scientific community have to offer about the usefulness of laboratory experiences for undergraduate students. To accomplish this, we reviewed scientific literature to discover the benefits of hands-on research in the classroom. However, we did not limit ourselves to an understanding of how laboratory experiences are useful for students. We also investigated the benefits of laboratory instruction experience for the graduate teaching assistants who conduct the labs. Finally, we investigated how the format of undergraduate laboratory experiments affects the value for students.

The bulk of our investigative process relied heavily on conducting primary research. Because the implementation of a laboratory will affect a multitude of different individuals, it was critical that we conducted interviews with a wide spectrum of people. Our primary sources fell into five major categories:

  1. University of Maryland Students: Undergraduate students in the Biological Sciences Program are required to take “Principles of Genetics,” and they are arguably the ones who will be most affected by the addition of a new laboratory component. In order to get an idea of how students would react to such a change, we interviewed four current undergraduates in the program who have taken “Principles of Genetics.” First, they were asked to share their opinions about the current discussion session and what they felt its sufficient and insufficient aspects are. Additionally, the students were asked to comment on how their laboratory experiences have helped or hindered their learning in other science courses. Finally and most importantly, the students were asked their opinions on the addition of a laboratory to the “Principles of Genetics” course. By posing these questions, we were able to get a feel for a typical undergraduate's thoughts about the problem at hand.
  2. University of Maryland Alumni: It has been previously mentioned that part of the problem with the current structure of the course is that it puts students at a disadvantage once they leave the university and enter the career field. In order to address this part of the problem, we interviewed recently graduated alumni who completed “Principles of Genetics” at the University of Maryland. The same questions asked to current students were posed to these individuals. We hoped to gain information on how the structure of the course prepared the alumni for both their more advanced studies and their continued endeavors after graduation. The responses to the interview questions reflect a level of understanding of the problem that goes beyond the knowledge of the typical undergraduate student.
  3. University of Maryland Faculty: In addition to students, the faculty and staff of the university will be impacted by the addition of a laboratory component to the existing course. The implementation of such a laboratory will require a great deal of time, money, and materials. In order to gain some insight into these issues, we contacted Dr. David Straney, who is an Associate Professor in the Department of Cell Biology and Molecular Genetics at the University of Maryland. Dr. Straney currently teaches Molecular Genetics Laboratory and therefore is knowledgeable on the types of resources currently available at the university. Dr. Straney was asked to explain the structure of his course, with a particular emphasis on the equipment utilized during the completion of laboratory exercises. From this information, we wished to gain an understanding of what space, machinery, and other essential resources are at the disposal of the department.
  4. Faculty at Other Universities: We next contacted professors involved in teaching genetics at Cornell University, St. Mary’s College of Maryland, University of Virginia, George Washington University, Gettysburg College, and Pepperdine University. We also asked these professors questions concerning the curriculum and structure of their laboratory component, specifically what experiments their students perform to reinforce concepts taught in lecture and teach important techniques. We also asked professors their opinions about the usefulness of an undergraduate laboratory as a teaching tool and whether they use investigative or traditional laboratories. We received responses from Dr. Jeffery Byrd, Professor and Chair of Biology at St. Mary's College of Maryland, Dr. Michael Goldberg Professor of Genetics at CornellUniversity, and Dr. Jay Brewster Associate Professor of Biology at PepperdineUniversity. We used their input to compare the experiments different schools perform in order to determine which experiments are the most effective at reinforcing the concepts taught in lecture.
  5. Students from Other Universities: Finally, we conducted email interviews with students at GettysburgCollege and the University of Virginia, both of which offer a laboratory component for their introductory genetics course. We asked the students about their overall experience in the laboratory setting. We wanted to know how the experiments they performed in laboratory enhanced what they learned in lecture, specifically if they felt the laboratory experience lead to their overall success in the class.

During our correspondence, several professors provided us with laboratory manuals from the courses they teach. We used these resources, as well as the laboratory manuals from other University of Maryland biology courses to investigate which experiments would be best suited to supplement the “Principles of Genetics” lecture.

Results and Findings

The results of our research support our claim that a required laboratory component for “Principles of Genetics” is a necessity for students seeking to gain to most knowledge from the course. This section discusses the findings of our secondary and primary research.

The scientific literature sheds light on the importance of laboratory experience in undergraduate studies. Experts feel that simply gaining knowledge through lectures is not an adequate means of relaying the concepts of science. According to Jack Carter of the American Institute of Biological Sciences, biology programs are not using their resources to become "centers of adventurous and futuristic thinking" (678). Because of numerous advances in the past decades, universities now have access to cutting-edge resources that allow students to understand the processes that guide natural phenomena (678). This being stated, it is absolutely essential that students be doing science in the laboratory setting (678). Carter stated, "Laboratory work should illustrate objects, concepts, processes, and experiments that have been referred to elsewhere in the curriculum" (680). Additionally, laboratories should be places where students are encouraged to discuss their findings with faculty and use their observations as a means to answer their questions about difficult concepts (680). Thus, a well-designed and implemented laboratory would satisfy the aims of a discussion section, and challenge students to use the scientific method to clarify confusing ideas.

Laboratory experience is particularly important for students in introductory courses. Rima Rozen, Scientific Director of the Montreal Children's Hospital and Deputy Scientific Director of the McGillUniversityHealthCenter, did not receive any exposure to the laboratory setting until she was completing her PhD dissertation at McGill. According to Rozen, those who wish to have a future in the biological sciences should get laboratory exposure as soon as possible in their education because the experiences afforded by conducting experiments help develop critical skills in students, such as persistence, endurance and patience (Mio 5). In an interview with the Montreal Gazette, Rozen stated, "you have to have a personality that allows you to overcome some sort of adversity…if you are going to collapse at the first experiment that doesn't work, this is not for you" (5). By gaining laboratory experience early in their studies, students have the added benefit of determining whether or not the field is suited for them.

In addition to the importance of laboratory experience for students in introductory courses, experts stress the necessity of teaching students about experimental design. After years of teaching, Arthur Buikema, Professor of Biology at Virginia Tech, became “frustrated with traditional ‘cookbook’ laboratory exercises” that provide step by step instructions “for laboratory procedures [that] confirm existing knowledge as presented in the teacher’s lectures” (Glasson 189). This traditional style of laboratory does not help students learn the concepts; they merely follow instructions from the laboratory manual. To avoid this problem Dr. Buikema designed an investigative laboratory that not only taught students about experimental design but also required students to become more involved in the laboratory exercise. In this type of experiment students are presented with a question and they must create a hypothesis, design and perform an experiment, and collect results to prove or disprove their hypothesis. The effectiveness of this type of learning was investigated by video taping the students as they designed and performed their experiments and by conducting interviews with students after completing the experiment. In interviews students expressed their enjoyment of the laboratory they felt it was “more personal and [they] learned more because [they] were the ones coming up with everything” (192). The results concluded that “students learn more….when they take an active part in learning” (192). Buikema’s study agrees with our claim that having students participate in laboratory helps them learn more about the topic they are studying in lecture.