Using EPosters to Map Collaborative InquiryBased Student Learning

1
Using E-Posters to Map Collaborative
Inquiry-Based Student Learning Kathy
Takayama School of Biotechnology and Biomolecular
Sciences The University of New South
Wales Sydney, Australia
2
Traditional model of the scientific inquiry
process
3

• Contextual application of discipline knowledge
  and skills
• Effective integration within authentic
  inquiry-based frameworks that promote deep
  learning
• Bransford For the student to construct
  scientific understanding, an iterative process of
  questioning, hypothesis building, critical
  analysis and refinement must be achieved through
  their own activities
• Importance of a reflective approach to
  encourage students to develop new ideas through
  the exploration of the subject, and through its
  contextual application

4
The goal for MICR2201 A reflective, iterative
model
5
In your discipline/experience, how do your
represent the process of your disciplinary
practice to your students? Is it effective in
engaging students in a learning experience that
authentically reflects the practice of your
discipline? (Why/why not?)
6
The Course MICR2201 Fundamentals of Microbiology
and Immunology
2nd year course 280 students majoring in
7
The Group Project
Laboratory experience
WebCT group discussions
Lectures
the e-poster
Isolation of a specific bacterial genus from the
environment
Individual research
Tutorials and discussions
the Bug Book
8
Collaborative reflection during each step of the
investigation
Development of conceptual links between lectures
and labs
the e-poster
Making connections to other groups research
Development of scientific literacy and critical
analysis
9
Knowledge Media Lab (Carnegie Foundation) http//w
ww.cfkeep.org/
10
(No Transcript)
11
3 submissions to map process week 5 week
10 week 14
eposter example
12
Planning and strategic development were conducted
in WebCT group discussions
I don't necessarily agree with you there Cherie.
I don't think that we HAVE to start the
biochemical tests this week without being certain
that a pure culture is obtained. If we test a
mixed culture, our results would be meaningless.
We still have time to carry out the tests in week
11. And secondly, the fungi that contaminated our
plates may not necessarily be our own fault or
carelessness as fungi overran the whole plate and
it is inevitable that the inoculating loop
touched some fungus along the way. I don't see
this as a negative because it is a part of the
unexpected factors that intervene with our
progress. I look at this as a challenge, rather
than a difficulty, which help us to think about
the solution required to tackle this problem. And
this is something we can reflect upon when
constructing the E poster.
13
Ive been looking over a few posters this
morning. my thoughts on the question "conceptual
links" can mean a few different things. i think
it could be as narrow as a direct comparison
between our approach and group6's approach to
proteus. then that also relates to everything
other groups are doing and which forms part of
our aim.. which is to investigate characteristics
and link these back to environmental
niches/isolation strategies. so far these
themes/concepts have stood out for me- sampling
from the environment (the importance in targeting
locations which proteus would exploit based on
its characteristics pathogenicity biochemical
tests. One of the references we used highlighted
a whole table of tests that could be used to tell
one species of proteus from another. Although we
arent doing this, it allows us a greater range
of tests to try. This method has also been
employed by groups doing pseudomonas. I think it
was group 2 that considered the diversity of
species in that genera and so they are using as
many tests as they can in the hope of obtaining
at least 1 positive test).
14
Totally agree Dan. We should use version 3 of
the poster as a learning tool and really focus on
bringing it together conceptually. I would even
suggest that we have a meeting (in a relaxed
atmosphere) where we talk about anything that we
are still confused about and help each other sort
things out... I think this could be a really good
revision that will make the poster even better
and of course help us with the final...
15
(No Transcript)
16
Where to next?

• Focus group interviews (5 focus groups with 6 8
  students/focus group).
• Further develop ways to encourage students to
  think about their learning- metacognition
• Students collaboratively develop group contract.
• Less scaffolding in e-poster 2.

17
2006
Group 9 Lactobacillus Group 19
Staphylococcus Group 6 Vibrio
18
Self-authorship
... is evidenced by the capacity to actively
listen to multiple perspectives, critically
interpret those perspectives in light of relevant
evidence and the internal foundation, and make
judgments accordingly.
- M. Baxter Magolda in M. Baxter Magolda P.M.
King, eds. (2004) Learning Partnerships theory
and models of practice to educate for
self-authorship. Stylus Sterling, Virginia
19
Cognitive Maturity Intellectual power Reflective
judgment Mature decision making Problem
solving in context
Integrated identity Understand ones history
Confidence Capacity for autonomy
and connection Integrity
Effective Citizenship Coherent, ethical action
for good of all intercultural maturity
Mature Relationships Respect for ones own and
others identities and cultures Productive
collaboration to integrate multiple
perspectives
20
Intrapersonal Foundation Choose own values and
identity in crafting an internally generated
sense of self that regulates
interpretation of experience and
choices
Epistemological Foundation
View knowledge as contextual Develop an internal
belief system via constructing, evaluating, and
interpreting judgments in light of available
frames of reference
Self-Authorship Capacity to internally define
a coherent belief system and identity
that coordinates mutual relations with others
Interpersonal Foundation Capacity to engage in
authentic, interdependent relationships with
diverse others in which self is not overshadowed
by a need for others approval, mutually
negotiating needs, and genuinely taking others
perspectives into account without being consumed
by them
21
Acknowledgments

• UNSW Learning and Teaching Grant
• Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of
  Teaching Knowledge Media Lab
• MICR2201 Course tutors and students