Teaching Research Best Practices through Early Career Experiential

Article Cite This: J. Chem. Educ. XXXX, XXX, XXX−XXX

pubs.acs.org/jchemeduc

Teaching Research Best Practices through Early Career Experiential Learning Paul A. E. Piunno,*,† Michael deBraga,‡ Troy A. Dexter,§ and Marc Laflamme*,† †

Department of Chemical and Physical Sciences and ‡Department of Biology and the Robert Gillespie Academic Skills Centre, University of Toronto Mississauga, 3359 Mississauga Road North, Mississauga, Ontario L5L 1C6, Canada § Gerace Research Centre, University of the Bahamas, Queen’s Highway, San Salvador Island, The Bahamas

Downloaded via UNIV GRONINGEN on August 7, 2019 at 12:54:09 (UTC). See https://pubs.acs.org/sharingguidelines for options on how to legitimately share published articles.

S Supporting Information *

ABSTRACT: Launching Your Research is a new course offering designed to engage undergraduate students in research at an early stage of their academic careers (sophomore− second year). This learning opportunity required students to identify research best practices and develop effective time, teamwork, and project management skills to succeed. With the aid of rubrics to scaffold this early introduction to scientific research, students lead every aspect of executing a comprehensive project that included the following: (1) designing a team-based interdisciplinary research project complete with a testable hypothesis; (2) identifying appropriate methodologies and sampling techniques; (3) gathering primary, fieldbased samples; (4) analysis of these samples using modern research instrumentation; (5) rigorous interpretation of results; and (6) dissemination of their findings via peer-reviewed scientific reports and conference-style presentations (both oral and poster). Ultimately, on the basis of feedback received from weekly reflection reports and course exit surveys, our students were observed to meet all of our Undergraduate Degree Level Expectations (UDLEs) in their second year of postsecondary education. KEYWORDS: Second-Year Undergraduate, Interdisciplinary/Multidisciplinary, Collaborative/Cooperative learning, Inquiry-Based/Discovery Learning, Problem Solving/Decision Making, Constructivism, Student-Centered Learning, Undergraduate Research

■

• gathering of primary, field-based geological, chemical, and biological data; • rigorous interpretation of the trends highlighted during data processing; • broad dissemination of novel results through in-class and regional conference presentations; • training and practice in modern project management methods; and • training and practice in teamwork skills development. Launching Your Research accentuated a nontraditional learning environment with substantive hands-on field-based learning opportunities, followed by student-designed laboratory experiments to investigate field samples returned to the University of Toronto Mississauga (UTM) for analysis. This was a half-credit course (of a 20 credit, 4 year degree) and, in its first offering, included 11 undergraduate students (sophomore− second year) mostly from the sciences (chemistry, biology), but also included students in the economics program. The course was taught by two faculty members, an earth scientist and an analytical chemist, allowing them to accentuate the multidisciplinary nature of field-based research. The decision to offer

INTRODUCTION

Senior undergraduate students are often expected to conduct and, in some cases, design independent research programs.1−6 In some cases, introduction to research has also been extended to junior undergraduate students.7−10 Although students are typically equipped with discipline-specific knowledge and skills that form the cornerstone of their degrees, rarely are they taught the broader career skills essential to the effective pursuit of academic and industrial research. To be more marketable, undergraduates are seeking out university experiences that accentuate training in workplace skills.11−18 Unfortunately, these experiences often fail to provide students with first-hand exposure to practical experimental design, which constitutes the backbone of most postgraduate careers in the sciences. Research autonomy requires a deep understanding of research best practices combined with the development of effective time management and realistic project mapping. In an attempt to transfer these skills to early career undergraduate students (sophomore−second year), we designed an optional, field-based experiential learning course, Launching Your Research, that included the following: • the design of a team-based interdisciplinary research project complete with a testable hypothesis subjected to current methodologies and instrumentation; © XXXX American Chemical Society and Division of Chemical Education, Inc.

Received: February 18, 2019 Revised: July 10, 2019

A

DOI: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.9b00136 J. Chem. Educ. XXXX, XXX, XXX−XXX

Journal of Chemical Education

Article

field samples (weeks 9−11) in both the earth science and chemistry teaching laboratories, all the while refining their project plans with regards to instrumentation requirements and associated training. The final week was dedicated to team presentations (poster and talk), allowing students to experience both facets of these common research dissemination techniques. Final team reports were due following the presentations and were designed to emulate research manuscripts. Our goal herein is to provide a template for effective introduction to hands-on team-based research experiences. First, we will briefly address the benefits of Agile project management. Then we will break down our learning objectives into a series of weekly assignments designed to transfer research best practices. We will follow up with the student reception of the approach and demonstrate how our learning objectives were successfully achieved.

Launching Your Research as a second-year course was based on a few factors, but most notably, students at the University of Toronto select their academic disciplines (either “Specialist” or “Major”) following the completion of their first year. As such, we wished to capture students after they have selected an academic direction, but early enough to allow the skills imparted from this experience to be used throughout their undergraduate degree, rather than acquiring these skills in their senior year, and utilizing them in their postdegree endeavors. As part of the semester-long course offering, students participated in a week-long field-research program at San Salvador Island, The Bahamas. San Salvador Island is ideally suited for undergraduate education because: • it hosts a mosaic of natural marine and lacustrine environments that showcase how geological, biological, and environmental factors limit the abundance and distribution of life; • it has a well-studied geological record of major climatic changes and fossils, which can be directly compared with modern ecosystems;19 and • it hosts the Gerace Research Centre (GRC), which is a cost-effective facility that is specifically designed to accommodate undergraduate field-programs.

■

LEARNING OBJECTIVES AND COURSE DEVELOPMENT The University of Toronto’s Undergraduate Degree Level Expectations26 (UDLEs) showcase important pedagogical milestones that all students must meet to graduate. These expectations include a broad range of personal and professional competencies that can be divided into six categories. • Breadth and Depth of Knowledge: The development of critical and analytical thinking allowing for in-depth understanding of their core discipline. • Knowledge of Methodologies: The theoretical understanding of methodological approaches combined with hands-on experience within discipline-specific laboratories. • Application of Knowledge: The ability to frame relevant questions within their core discipline and to apply discipline-specific tools to address these questions. • Communication Skills: Effective written and oral communication that can identify and construct logical arguments in addition to critically evaluating arguments and analyses. • Awareness of Limits of Knowledge: Defining and acknowledging personal knowledge boundaries in addition to appreciating discipline limits that are continuously shifting as new knowledge is generated and collectively incorporated. • Autonomy and Professional Capacity: Acquiring the skills and knowledge necessary to become creative thinkers and to become aware of how they learn (metacognition). Exposing students to research best practices is an effective means to achieve these UDLEs.15,27,28 To facilitate the early mastery of these objectives, the course was scaffolded into a series of assignments (Table 1) that guided students through the key facets of the research process. This approach allowed the course instructors to highlight the nuances associated with these fundamental components of scientific research, all the while empowering students and facilitating their engagement in their first significant research experience.

The cornerstones of Launching Your Research were the importance of interdisciplinary research and the benefits of effective teamwork through heightened communication.20,21 Truly interdisciplinary initiatives, such as the AIRLab program,22,23 showcase the benefits of peer-based learning in a project-based learning environment. Removing traditional academic (departmental) divisions among students and faculty emulates the modern shift toward large, interdisciplinary working groups in academic, private, and governmental sectors. To facilitate their introduction to interdisciplinary research, student teams were taught the Agile method of project management,22,23 which focuses on breaking up daunting research projects into a series of small, manageable tasks. Change is embraced by Agile, so that project tasks (and the overall project direction) can quickly and effectively adapt to changing project requirements, which become better defined as new knowledge is accrued. Complementing the training in project management, each team was expected to regularly update a common online reporting platform that served as both a project management system and a digital laboratory notebook. Furthermore, students were trained in effective reflective practices through weekly reports following a modified DEAL (describe, examine, and assess learning) model.23−25 Launching Your Research was divided into three main pedagogical programs, namely, pretravel preparation, fieldresearch, and post-travel activities. Given the difficulties of undertaking an interdisciplinary research project, and to ensure the transfer of research best practices, the course was scaffolded into a series of weekly activities that built upon themselves. Each activity was accompanied by a detailed rubric provided ahead of time that highlighted the learning objectives and specifically addressed how best to succeed (see Supporting Information). The pretravel phase of the course (weeks 1−7) was designed to allow student teams to propose a testable hypothesis based on their survey of peer-reviewed literature, and to construct a sampling procedure to test their hypothesis. Week 8 consisted of 6 days of field research on San Salvador Island, where student teams collaborated to collect the necessary data for each project. Upon returning to UTM, students processed and analyzed their

■

STAGE 1: PRETRAVEL

Getting the Project Started: Assembling an Agile Storyboard

The course began with a formal introduction to the Agile method of project management through an in-class lecture. B



Article

their teammates. These contributions comprised a point form summary (without interpretation) of the key results of each story card. Similarly, in the “Describe Your Progress” section, each student specified what they did to support the project (and team) based on completion of their assigned stories. It is important that students include links to the storyboard when tabulating their weekly team and personal progress because it ensures that the storyboard is kept up-to-date with all relevant progress made by the team, and no individual team member is drawing on work that is not shared. In the “Examine” section, students articulate how their work was related to the team progress. This ensures that all work done is relevant to the project, and that tangential pursuits can be quickly identified and removed from the project plan (i.e., “Obsoleted” story cards). Students are encouraged to reflect upon their progress in order to facilitate the creation and prioritization of upcoming “To Do” stories. In the “Assess Learning” section, a reflective account is provided, detailing what the students learned over their last week, and how they achieved that learning. An articulation of how their work is relevant to the project is again provided, which forms the basis for meaningful storyboard discussions among the research team. Finally, the report concludes with a selfassessment by the students, in which they provide a recommended teamwork grade for themselves for the work they did to support the research team. Teams were provided with training in teamwork skills development via exposure to the Kolb Learning Style Inventory,29 allowing them to become aware of their preferred learning style and, then, by exploring other learning styles and engaging with teammates who self-identify with differing preferences, learn to problem solve in an optimal capacity and avoid conflict.

Table 1. Scaffolded Delivery of Launching Your Research Stage

Week

Pretravel

San Salvador Post-travel

1 2 3 4−7 8 (Reading week) 9−11 11

Ongoing

12 13 13 13 weekly

Task Preliminary Agile storyboard Testable hypothesis Annotated bibliography Methods design (iterative) Field research (San Salvador Island, The Bahamas) Lab Work, results, and interpretation First draft of final report and rubric development Peer review Poster presentations Oral presentations Final report Agile storyboard updates

Grade Value (%) 5 5 5 5 10 5 5 5 10 10 25 10

Following this, students self-selected their teams and were then tasked to put Agile training into practice. The success of Agile is based on its core tenets of continual reflection, open communication among the team, and reassessment of research goals and directions in response to the acquisition of new knowledge. Briefly, the students created a virtual storyboard in the form of an online wiki that subdivided the path to the ultimate research goal into a map of manageable daily work tasks (called story cards). Tasks are initially prioritized in the “To Do” area of the storyboard. Following this, prioritized tasks to be worked on during the current week are moved from the “To Do” area to the “In Progress” area of the storyboard. Each in-progress task is assigned to a given team member, and all design work and results accrued from working on that task are appended in real time to the storyboard via individual story cards. Once completed and properly documented, story cards move to the “Completed” section of the storyboard, which serves as a repository of completed work. As such, throughout the research project, story cards are constantly in motion: migrating from “To Do” to “In Progress” and finishing in either the “Completed” or “Obsoleted” categories (for stories deemed to be no longer of relevance to the project goal). The result of this approach is that all student team members (and course instructors) are kept abreast of research progress in real time.22,23 Consistent with the core Agile tenet of continuous reflection, students were taught to cogitate on their progress through the weekly submission of reflection reports. These reports were a modified version of the DEAL method23−25(see Supporting Information). In the first section, “Describe Team Progress”, each student identified the progress made by the ensemble team. This served to ensure that each team member maintained an awareness of all of the undertakings and contributions made by

Constructing a Testable Hypothesis

For early career undergraduate students, research has very little tangible meaning. Students tend to be familiar with primary literature, although rarely do they appreciate discipline limits of knowledge, and as such, they view primary literature as gospel. They typically have been taught the basics of hypothesis testing, although in most cases they erroneously confuse it with “descriptive observations” or “predictions” rather than true hypotheses grounded in pattern explanation.30 It has been our experience that research projects directed by undergraduates function best if a direct hypothesis is proposed early on, and all future scaffolded activities continuously refer back to the chosen hypothesis to be tested.13,16 To this end, our week 2 in-class breakout activity was to distinguish “research topics” from “research goals” and “research hypotheses”. Research topics were typically described by students as subsections within disciplines (in our case, “climate change” or “coral bleaching”). This initial step was familiar to most students as it represents how most term-paper topics are

Table 2. Student Hypotheses Team

Students, N

Research Hypotheses

1

3

2

4

3

4

That, due to anthropogenic activities, live foraminiferal (Protist) assemblages at the sediment−water interface will contain higher concentrations of trace metals (e.g., Al, Fe, Mn, Zn, Cu, Cr) than subsurface (fossil) assemblages and accordingly feature a higher incidence of morphological abnormalities. That fresh water lakes near human settlements will have higher concentrations of impactful water contaminants (e.g., iron, phosphate, ammonium) when compared to lakes located further away from towns and villages, which may be attributed to high levels of pollution from pesticide runoff and human waste. That a positive association between the percentage of coral reef cover and both the abundance and diversity of fish species will be found. Prior research states that this is due to the mutualistic relationship between coral and fish. Species of fish are reliant on coral reefs to provide them with essential resources such as shelter, food, and protection from predators. Conversely, the fish rid corals of toxins and disease. Human induced activities, such as the tourism and fishery industry, cause the extensive deterioration of live coral reefs, which subsequently disrupts the marine ecology of San Salvador. Death of coral reefs will lead to the vast decline in San Salvador’s tourism industry, which is estimated to make up 50% of the GDP of the Bahamian Islands. C



Article

Figure 1. Team leadership and teamwork in the field. (a) Team 3 directed (and participated in) a survey of aquatic life abundance and diversity off the southern shore of San Salvador Island. (b) Under the direction of team 2, members from all three teams participated in subsurface sediment collection at Fresh Lake.

uniquely contained in each section (i.e., abstract, introduction, methods, etc.). This also served the secondary purpose of having students identify the content nuances associated with each section of a manuscript (e.g., differentiating results from discussion). All annotated bibliographies were posted on the project management storyboard, allowing each team to effectively share their findings, thus reducing overlap in information gathering efforts and promoting efficient dissemination of relevant information among the group.

defined. Defining their research goals was less intuitive. Through peer-to-peer discussions in class, students were able to isolate specific questions they found interesting and were able to relate them back to the research topic. For instance, our students were interested in comparing “healthy” vs “damaged” reefs, or investigating the effects of anthropogenic activities on water quality. However, defining a hypothesis, i.e., describing the potential explanations for any observed patterns in the data,30 proved to be a significant challenge. At first, most students attempted to identify suitable “predicted observations” that they could test. For example, students “hypothesized” that reefs closer to resorts would be more damaged, or that lake samples closer to human settlements would contain more heavy metals. However, these are not hypotheses as they do not attempt to explain the observed phenomena. To help, we designed an inclass activity in which student teams were tasked with differentiating between a research topic, goal, and hypothesis. Each team then presented their hypothesis statement, which was then peer-critiqued by the class. The final hypothesis statements are provided in Table 2. The identification of team hypotheses early on allowed instructors to always bring back discussions to the specific hypothesis in play, which drastically reduced needless exploratory research directions and maintained student research focus on their end goals.

Experimental Methods Design

Effective use of the annotated bibliographies shared on the storyboard allowed students to proceed to research protocol and experimental design, permitting them to address and properly evaluate their research hypothesis with the most appropriate methodology. Students were initially provided with a detailed rubric that outlined the key features of an effective methodology (see Supporting Information). From this, it became apparent that students had difficulties with the identification of methods that worked within the constraints of the 13 week course. Most notably, students struggled with devising experiments that were compatible with the instruments and consumables available. Furthermore, students struggled with estimating the amount of time that each experiment would require, resulting in projects that would extend well beyond the semester-long course offering. Several rounds of feedback and revision of these methodologies followed, and through this process, students came to terms with the difficulties of transferring theoretical methods into practical in-field sample collection and analysis in the laboratory.

Developing an Annotated Bibliography

In order to have students best utilize primary literature for the purpose of designing a research project, they were provided with formal instruction by a science liaison librarian. This resulted in a dedicated session in the library where topics such as “the meaning of journal impact factors” and “the value of citation metrics” were taught, in addition to differentiating primary from secondary literature. The students were introduced to scientific databases that ranged from broad-based searches (e.g., Scopus, Web of Science) in addition to subject-specific databases (e.g., Analytical Methods), for the identification of appropriate methods targeting their research hypotheses and specific instruments. Following the identification of appropriate primary literature, students were instructed on how to properly assemble a meaningful annotated bibliography (see rubric in Supporting Information). This included the detailed deconstruction of a research paper so as to highlight the pertinent information

■

STAGE 2: IN THE FIELD

Fieldwork was conducted on San Salvador Island, The Bahamas, based out of the Gerace Research Centre of the University of The Bahamas. On a daily basis, instructors and students reviewed sampling priorities and field sites. For each field site, students undertook different roles; the team for which samples were being collected first taught their peers (i.e., students from the other research teams) how sampling was to be done and, with their classmates, also participated in sample collection (Figure 1). As such, each team took a leadership role at their D



Article

of these, students were provided with instruction on how to prepare effective poster and oral presentations, in addition to the rubrics that would be used to evaluate the quality of their communications (see Supporting Information). In all cases, an emphasis was placed on clear communication of the project hypothesis, and a concise overview of the methods used, followed by the most significant outcomes and conclusions drawn.

sampling sites and effectively managed the larger student workforce. Each evening, students assembled in a common room for progress review sessions (also known as scrums). These scrums began with a quick verbal team report on the events of the day, followed by a reflection on achievements and setbacks, and ended with the production of a revised plan for the next day’s activities. Once all teams completed their reports and refined their work plans, specific field sites were selected, and all sampling tools were assembled for the following day. These revised work plans were immediately posted to the storyboard to ensure there were no misinterpretations, and to keep those team members who were not able to be in the field informed about the evolving project plan. One specific example involved the students coming to terms with how their water sampling plans had to be changed upon learning that the equipment available for in-field sensing was damaged. This required the students to reflect on their hypothesis and, together with their teammates, devise a new approach grounded in primary literature. For a colorful view of a day in the life of our field-research students, please see the online student blog.31

■

■

LEARNING OUTCOMES: MEETING DEGREE LEVEL EXPECTATIONS IN THE SECOND YEAR The pedagogical success of this course offering has been demonstrated through student comments obtained from their weekly reflection reports, their blog posts during the week on San Salvador Island,31 anonymous course evaluations, and a final exit survey managed by deBraga and kept anonymous from the course instructors (Laflamme and Piunno). Success was measured relative to the UTM UDLEs and how they were being met by sophomore (2nd year) students. When considering Knowledge of Methodologies, students were, at first, overwhelmed with the breadth of possible methodological approaches available. Through teamwork and reflection, students were able to focus on the approach that had the highest probability of providing the data necessary to test their hypotheses in the time frame available. Many different tests were published to assess different aspects of our topic, however we had to be able to weigh the pros and cons of each method and whether or not it was feasible to carry out in the given time frame. Although we were finding these tests, we always had to think back to whether or not the results would actually provide us with valuable information to support or negate our hypothesis... Another important aspect involved the recognition by students that not all data generated held the same value. ...this course brought one to appreciate the ambiguity inherent to certain experimental protocols, even those which had snaked [sic] past the peer review process. From an Application of Knowledge standpoint, most students felt at ease in terms of traditional learning approaches (e.g., classroom + literature-based learning); however, none had had the experience of applying this discipline-specific knowledge in a truly academic way. In a general science program, a lot of research theory and literature research skills are taught, however this course presented the intricacies involved in planning and executing a concrete research project. This provided students with the opportunity to apply the theoretical skills that they had acquired to a practical research question... Launching Your Research was also an opportunity to apply their knowledge in a completely different setting. Field research, at its core, requires researchers to be flexible in their approach to data collection due to difficulties (in our case, weather, tides, access to field sites, instrument malfunction, etc.) that arise when conducting research outside of the confines of a laboratory. Our field research was hectic at first as groups struggled to fit their predetermined methodology into the unpredictable nature of fieldwork. Whether it was duct-taping big rocks to quadrats that float away and get lost in the water... or facing the fact that neither the salinity meter nor the dissolved oxygen meter could calibrate properly after water damage from a hurricane; we all survived and powered through our obstacles to get the data that we needed.

STAGE 3: POST-TRAVEL

Lab Work, Results, and Interpretation

On returning to UTM, students were provided time to complete their experiments in our teaching and research laboratories. The course instructors were available during these laboratory work times and served as sounding boards to assist the students in critically evaluating the significance and quality of their results, in addition to assisting the students in identifying follow-up methods in cases where the initial results obtained were questionable. Final Report Assembly, Student Led Rubric Development, and Peer Review

While student teams were completing their experimental work, they were also tasked with producing a first draft of their report for peer review. The report was to be prepared in the form of a scientific research manuscript that (in principle) could be submitted for publication. Report submission was followed by a breakout session in which the merits of a good scientific paper were discussed, followed by development of a rubric by the class for assessment of their reports (see Supporting Information). To have the students engage in the peer-review process, teams were provided with manuscript evaluation guidelines mimicking those provided by established journals (see Supporting Information). Using these guidelines, each team critically evaluated the quality of the other teams’ manuscripts and provided suggestions for improvement. The student peer reviews were submitted to the course instructors, who acted as the editors of the science journal. The student reviews were vetted by the course instructors and graded (see Supporting Information for the rubric). Student reviews were supplemented with individual reviews written by each course instructor; these ensemble reviews (totaling three) were made anonymous and then forwarded to the authors of the manuscripts for reflection ahead of final submission. Communicating Their Work

The final week of class was dedicated to team presentations. Presentations took the form of both a scientific poster and a 15 min, conference-style oral presentation; presentations were attended by several university faculty members and staff. Ahead E



Article

It’s important to let go of past work in order to move on. While we spent so much time and effort researching, familiarizing, and basing our whole paper on a specific method, the situation forced us to be agile and rethink our process. Our students, at an early stage of their university education, self-identified the benefits of continuous reflection on their learning, both personally and in group contexts. I think the weekly reflection reports were a very integral part of this course. A lot of times, I think its [sic] important to step back from the project and look at it objectively and the weekly reflection reports allowed us to do just that. Several times during the project while writing the weekly reflection reports I would find myself questioning what the significance of my work that week had been for the project in the larger picture. Student metacognition was most prevalent when students were asked to reflect on the utility of the Kolb Learning Style Inventory: I think there is a definite benefit to having people of the “Assimilators” learning style in our group. These individuals generally prefer to think before acting, and I am hoping that as we continue to resolve the challenges faced in the laboratory, I will get some insight from an objective perspective... Furthermore, I feel like since I like to jump into lab work after getting a sense for the methodology, having group members that take more time to critically evaluate the work might help me gain insight. Thus, in terms of all our different learning styles, I think we are finally reaching a middle ground wherein all of us have a sense for how the other individuals will react or behave when the group faces a challenge... and I am definitely moving out of my learning style and doing a lot more hands-on work and learning a lot more through “doing” rather than listening or observing as I prefer...

In terms of Communication Skills development, students expressed a noticeable improvement in their ability to convey complex topics to a general audience. Furthermore, they identified instances where their writing skills improved as they incorporated the lessons taught in class. I feel like I have acquired the ability to present complex science to diverse audiences. While writing the paper, our team had to make sure that we were limiting our use of scientific jargon and were writing in a clear, coherent, and concise manner. and I have found that the process of conducting a peer review has allowed me to look at our paper more critically and emphasized to us again the important qualities that a paper should possess for us to incorporate into our final paper. Students further contemplated the importance of open communication within the team, especially when dealing with multidisciplinary projects: I learned how important it is that the whole team needs to be on the same page before continuing a project. If anyone has an issue with the procedure, or is unclear about why we are completing a certain step, it is crucial to have a discussion to clarify everything. While it is easy to simply “go with the flow”, it is much more beneficial to walk through the specifics of the underlying issue... The ability to identify discipline-specific Limits of Knowledge represents the cornerstone of a university education. However, the transition from students capable of understanding the intricacies of scientific research, to those who can correctly identify factual inconsistencies in methodological approaches, ultimately requires them to have experienced these difficulties first-hand. Before taking this course I assumed that everything published in scientific literature was absolutely perfect because it had been through the peer-review process. I believed that a scientists [sic] interpretation of the data had to be correct because he/she was the scientist! However, after going through tens of papers on my topic, I learned that the [sic] ambiguity does exist in the scientific world. Researchers interpret data so differently depending on the hypothesis and study design of the experiment. A lot of times, during my primary literature searches, I came across studies in which researchers reported that their findings were consistent with the hypothesis but did not demonstrate clearly why or how that was. Some studies analyzed water quality and attributed poor water quality to variables that were not controlled for, or even being tested in the experiment. Through this course, I gained a deeper appreciation for how ambiguous the interpretation of scientific data can be. The final UDLE, Autonomy and Professional Capacity, represents the pinnacle of student development and, in our opinion, showcases the importance of experiential learning. This week I truly understood the beauty of the agile method. Nobody could have predicted the obstacles we faced this week [fieldwork on the island], even with all the precautions we took before leaving, we still ran into problem after problem... However, we all still soldiered on and tweaked our methods to the point where our data collection was both doable and scientifically sound. and

■

CONCLUSIONS AND REFLECTIONS As instructors, our ultimate goal is to have our students develop critical thinking and metacognitive skills, allowing them to become effective problem solvers and self-learners. Through the Launching Your Research experience, which had students engage in team-based, interdisciplinary research projects in which weekly reflection, teamwork, and project management skills training was provided, we are confident that our students have met (and possibly surpassed) our UDLEs at an early stage in their undergraduate education. Following student feedback and reflections on our teaching experiences, we identified a few difficulties that we hope to limit in our next offering of Launching Your Research. Most notably, the overall amount of coursework, and the time needed to reflect on research practices, makes it difficult to offer as a semesterlong course. We are currently negotiating to have Launching Your Research offered as a year-long course offered in our home department (Chemical and Physical Sciences). A second difficulty concerned how to manage students that were unable to undertake the field trip (2 students). In terms of grading, we put additional weight on the laboratory notebook to compensate for not submitting a field notebook. Thankfully, student teams were not greatly impacted by the loss of team members because the online storyboard was updated daily, by both students on the island and those at the university, so that everyone was aware of the progress made. In fact, having F



Article

students at the university capable of rushing to the library to find additional primary literature on issues arising while in the field allowed for the projects to progress with minimal disruption. The greatest challenge we faced was to transition students from traditional learning approaches toward experiential learning. In many cases, students were held back from facing research challenges because of their fear of failing. This was particularly evident when in the field because none of the students had any background in field techniques (proper sampling, cataloging, site descriptions, etc.), which typically rely on hands-on approaches to data collection (rather than gathering information from primary literature). Instructors deliberately took a hands-off approach to training once in the field, allowing students to struggle with the data collection, and problem solve when facing sampling difficulties. By the end of the week, students were effectively self-reliant and only came to us once they had made several attempts that did not work. Ideally, Launching Your Research will allow students to apply and further develop valued career skills to the benefit of their learning experience and academic performance as they complete their university degrees and pursue their career aspirations.

■

(4) Danowitz, A. M.; Brown, R. C.; Jones, C. D.; Diegelman-Parente, A.; Taylor, C. E. A Combination Course and Lab-Based Approach To Teaching Research Skills to Undergraduates. J. Chem. Educ. 2016, 93 (3), 434−438. (5) Dillner, D. K.; Ferrante, R. F.; Fitzgerald, J. P.; Schroeder, M. J. Global Curriculum Changes To Facilitate Undergraduate Research Experiences. In Developing and Maintaining a Successful Undergraduate Research Program; Chapp, T. W., Benvenuto, M. A., Eds.; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 2013; pp 163−186. (6) Olivares-Donoso, R.; González, C. Undergraduate Research or Research-Based Courses: Which Is Most Beneficial for Science Students? Res. Sci. Educ. 2019, 49 (1), 91−107. (7) Chen, W. Introduction to Research: A New Course for First-Year Undergraduate Students. J. Chem. Educ. 2018, 95 (9), 1526−1532. (8) Canaria, J. A.; Schoffstall, A. M.; Weiss, D. J.; Henry, R. M.; BraunSand, S. B. A Model for an Introductory Undergraduate Research Experience. J. Chem. Educ. 2012, 89 (11), 1371−1377. (9) Ghanem, E.; Long, S. R.; Rodenbusch, S. E.; Shear, R. I.; Beckham, J. T.; Procko, K.; DePue, L.; Stevenson, K. J.; Robertus, J. D.; Martin, S.; Holliday, B.; Jones, R. A.; Anslyn, E. V.; Simmons, S. L. Teaching through Research: Alignment of Core Chemistry Competencies and Skills within a Multidisciplinary Research Framework. J. Chem. Educ. 2018, 95 (2), 248−258. (10) Tomasik, J. H.; LeCaptain, D.; Murphy, S.; Martin, M.; Knight, R. M.; Harke, M. A.; Burke, R.; Beck, K.; Acevedo-Polakovich, I. D. Island Explorations: Discovering Effects of Environmental ResearchBased Lab Activities on Analytical Chemistry Students. J. Chem. Educ. 2014, 91 (11), 1887−1894. (11) Burstein, J. Learning from innovation: implications of an integrated development project in Chiapas, Mexico. Development in Practice 2009, 19 (3), 371−380. (12) Kolb, D. A. Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development; Prentice Hall: Upper Saddle River, NJ, 1984. (13) Kolb, D. A. Experiential Learning: From Discourse Model to Conversation. Lifelong Learning in Europe 1998, 3, 148−153. (14) O’Shea, A. Models of WIL. In Work Integrated Learning in the Curriculum; Ferns, S., Ed.; Higher Education Research and Development Society of Australasia: Hammondville, Australia, 2014; Vol. 1, pp 7−14. (15) Sattler, P.; Peters, J. Work-Integrated Learning in Ontario’s Postsecondary Sector: The Experience of Ontario Graduates; Higher Education Quality Council of Ontario, 2013. http://www.heqco.ca/ SiteCollectionDocuments/WIL_Experience_ON_Graduates_ENG. pdf (accessed July 10, 2019). (16) Akella, D. Learning together: Kolb’s experiential theory and its application. Journal of Management and Organization 2010, 16 (1), 100−112. (17) Stirling, A.; Kerr, G.; Banwell, J.; MacPherson, E.; Heron, A. A practical guide for work-integrated learning: Effective practices to enhance the educational quality of the structured work experience offered through Colleges and Universities. Higher Education Quality Council of Ontario; 2016. http://www.heqco.ca/ SiteCollectionDocuments/HEQCO_WIL_Guide_ENG_ACC.pdf (accessed July 10, 2019). (18) McDermott, M. L. Lowering Barriers to Undergraduate Research through Collaboration with Local Craft Breweries. J. Chem. Educ. 2016, 93 (9), 1543−1548. (19) Darroch, S. A. F.; Laflamme, M.; Schiffbauer, J. D.; Briggs, D. E. G. Experimental formation of a microbial death mask. Palaios 2012, 27 (5), 293−303. (20) Kolb, D. A.; Boyatzis, R. E.; Mainemelis, C. Experiential Learning Theory: Previous Research and New Directions. In Perspectives on Thinking, Learning, and Cognitive Styles; Sternberg, R. J., Zhang, L., Eds.; Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.: Mahwah, NJ, 2001; Vol. 1, pp 227− 247. DOI: 10.4324/9781410605986. (21) Kolb, A. Y.; Kolb, D. A. Learning styles and learning spaces: Enhancing experiential learning in higher education. Academy of Management Learning & Education 2005, 4 (2), 193−212.

ASSOCIATED CONTENT

S Supporting Information *

The Supporting Information is available on the ACS Publications website at DOI: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.9b00136.

■

Rubrics (ZIP) Student peer-review template (PDF, DOCX) Weekly self-reflection report template (PDF, DOCX)

AUTHOR INFORMATION

Corresponding Authors

*E-mail: [email protected]. *E-mail: marc.lafl[email protected]. ORCID

Paul A. E. Piunno: 0000-0001-6809-2843 Notes

The authors declare no competing financial interest.

■

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We gratefully acknowledge financial report received via the UTM Dean’s Priority Fund. Tanya Kenesky (GIS & Data Support Specialist, UTM Library) is thanked for her instrumental help while on San Salvador Island, and Jacqueline Goodman for her leadership of the utmONE Scholars program. We are also indebted to The Gerace Research Centre and its staff on San Salvador Island, The Bahamas, for logistical support for this research.

■

REFERENCES

(1) May, N. W.; McNamara, S. M.; Wang, S.; Kolesar, K. R.; Vernon, J.; Wolfe, J. P.; Goldberg, D.; Pratt, K. A. Polar Plunge: Semester-Long Snow Chemistry Research in the General Chemistry Laboratory. J. Chem. Educ. 2018, 95 (4), 543−552. (2) Pagano, J. K.; Jaworski, L.; Lopatto, D.; Waterman, R. An Inorganic Chemistry Laboratory Course as Research. J. Chem. Educ. 2018, 95 (9), 1520−1525. (3) Burkett, J. R.; Dwyer, T. M. Combining Inquiry-Based and TeamTeaching Models to Design a Research-Driven, Cross-Disciplinary Laboratory Course. J. Chem. Educ. 2019, 96 (4), 660−667. G



Article

(22) Piunno, P. A. E.; Boyd, C.; Barzda, V.; Gradinaru, C. C.; Krull, U. J.; Stefanovic, S.; Stewart, B. The Advanced Interdisciplinary Research Laboratory: A Student Team Approach to the Fourth-Year Research Thesis Project Experience. J. Chem. Educ. 2014, 91 (5), 655−661. (23) Laflamme, M.; Krull, U. J.; deBraga, M.; Piunno, P. A. E. The Advanced Interdisciplinary Research Laboratory Course: Refinements, Reflections, and the Introduction of Earth Sciences. J. Coll. Sci. Teach. 2018, 48 (1), 24−29. (24) Ash, S. L.; Clayton, P. H. Generating, Deepening, and Documenting Learning: The Power of Critical Reflection in Applied Learning. Journal of Applied Learning in Higher Education 2009, 1 (3), 25−48. (25) Stellman, A.; Green, J. Learning Agile; Treseler, M., Ed.; O’Reilly Media, Inc.: Sebastopol, CA, 2015. (26) University of Toronto Mississauga Undergraduate Degree Level Expectations. http://www.utm.utoronto.ca/dean/sites/files/dean/ public/shared/Degree%20Level%20Expectations%202016.pdf (accessed July 10, 2019). (27) Ghaye, T. Teaching and Learning Through Reflective Practice: A Practical Guide for Positive Action, 2nd ed.; Routledge: New York, 2011. DOI: 10.4324/9780203833322. (28) Mathews, S. R.; Lowe, K. Classroom environments that foster a disposition for critical thinking. Learning Environments Research 2011, 14 (1), 59−73. (29) Kolb, A. Y; Kolb, D. A. Learning Style Inventory, Version 3.2.; Hay Resources Direct: Boston, 2013. (30) McPherson, G. R. Teaching and Learning the Scientific Method. American Biology Teacher 2001, 63 (4), 242−245. (31) UTM290H5 San Salvador Trip in Students’ Words. https:// bahamastripblog.wordpress.com (accessed July 10, 2019).

H


Teaching Research Best Practices through Early Career Experiential

Recommend Documents