M B 12 - Introduction to Microbiology - Stage 5 - Carole Toebe
Assessment
| Assessment Methods |
|
|---|---|
| Assessment Description | Assessment of month long laboratory and written report project involving a grading rubric Assessment of written lab protocol summaries submitted prior to labs Observation/Assessment of microscope care and upkeep using a checklist |
| Learning Outcomes | N through S |
| Number of Sections | 3 |
| Number of Instructors | 1 |
| Number of Students | 62 |
Data Analysis
| Data Shared With |
|
|---|---|
| Data Sharing Methods |
|
| Data Summary | 1. 60/62 students completing Toebe’s classes attended a study skills workshop early in the semester. 2. Approximately 1/3 (21 students were documented as receiving voluntary peer-mentored tutoring or study help with a student tutor in the BRC over the semester. Of these 6 received grade A’s, 3 received grade B’s, 7 received C’s and 1 received an F. 3. Toebe taught 3 sections of MB 12 in the spring of 2013 and noted the following averages for the classes that all had comparable test questions and exams. These averages were 75%, 87% and 79% 4. Bacterial ID project scores were 84%, 92% and 85% averages respectively 5. Within a few short weeks, over 90% improved their lab protocol summaries, and consistently scored between 4 and 5 on reports worth 5 points each. This included completing the main purpose of an experiment and identifying the necessary materials and methods to be employed. 6. Use of a microscope upkeep and storage checklist by 2 instructors and ~120 students identified that over 95% students correctly carried out these functions with only minor lapses in upkeep. |
| Analysis Summary | This variation in scores between sections was noted consistently on different assignments and exams throughout the semester despite similar treatment of classes. Instructors reimplemented a grading rubric for the bacterial ID project. Toebe provided a more directed lesson on how to generate dichotomous keys and cite peer-reviewed sources. This appeared to improve most student outcomes in this area. Following previous semester the instructors believe students need more hands on experience and in class instruction on this area Students were asked to turn in short (limit one page typed) summaries of lab purpose, materials and methods for most new labs at the start of the period. Assignments were not accepted if they were more than 5 minutes late. This definitely improved student preparedness and attendance. Within a few short weeks, over 90% improved their reports, and consistently scored between 4 and 5 on reports worth 5 points each. As a result this will be reimplemented. The purpose of this assignment was to have students take responsibility for key equipment and understand the importance of their working parts (Object. R). As evidenced by very good upkeep of the microscopes, other than minor wear and tear, and participation of all students (approx 120) we feel this is a worthwhile exercise to reinstate. |
| Next Steps Planned | From Fall 2012 observations and data we instituted or reinsituted the following during the spring of 2013 in an attempt to improve student performance 1. Ongoing. Offer study skills workshops early in the term and have ongoing tutoring available for students 2. Improve student reports specifically in their ability to construct a dichotomous key and to include peer reviewed reports and in text citations. Toebe gave specific in class instructions in addition to a previous website with links to examples of written reports 3. ongoing:improve care of the microscope and institute an upkeep checklist |
| Learning Outcomes | Refer to previous answers |
Changes
| Details | New assessments: Grading of lab protocol summaries Checklist for microscope upkeep and care Analysis of construction of dichotomous keys and citation of peer-reviewed sources |
|---|---|
| Learning Outcomes | Refer to previous answers |
GE Area C Details
| Learning Outcomes | No answer |
|---|---|
| Number Students: Proficient | No answer |
| Number Students: Developing | No answer |
| Number Students: No Evidence | No answer |
| Criteria | No answer |
| Extra Details | No answer |
Tentative Future Plans
| Term | Fall 2013 |
|---|---|
| Activities |
|
| More Details | Compare student performance on selected questions between lab instructors Apply student survey to assess what elements of study skills workshops they used prior to and after workshops and how often Apply survey to tutors to ID areas that may need more attention by instructors continue assessment rubric of bacterial ID projects, lab protocols and microscope upkeep |
SLO Details Storage Location
- ELECTRONIC COPY - In my electronic filing system (hard drive or web server)
- ELECTRONIC COPY - On a department web server or shared document system