If Everyone Else Is Doing It, Then Why Can't I?

Last week, we ended Module 1 of GRAD602.  It got me thinking and realizing that I am incredibly stubborn when it comes to change.  Especially technology changes.  Maybe it is a failure on my part to truly learn how the technology works.  Or, the fact that I want to stay off the grid when it comes to certain technologies.  However, my obstinate refusal to embrace these new technologies in the classroom cannot continue.  I have to change.  Because....

Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be.
-John Wooden

When I refuse to change, I am reminded of this blog posting that Nature tweeted (and I retweeted...see I am trying to embrace new technologies, although I have only tweeted 2 tweets...change can be slow, at first!).  This blog entry summarizes a study which concluded that scientists who actively engaged the public performed better academically.  Additionally, this blog entry highlights that the article was from 2008 and it would be interesting to see if this finding still holds up in the world of Twitter, Facebook, YouTube and newer social media outlets.  But, is there a time where exposing too much is a bad thing?  The hashtag on Twitter #overlyhonestmethods reveals the everday truths about mistakes in scientific experiments tweeted by scientists themselves.  This article highlights some examples.  However, I did a quick Twitter search of this hashtag and revealed these tweets:

"I said I chose the 36hr timepoint based on the literature, but I actually chose it b/c I overslept the 24hr timepoint"

"I'm sure the measurements were done in centimeters, I mean I'm pretty sure....."

Does this "overexposure" create a bad image for a scientist? 

My first instinct is to say yes.  But, maybe not.  Maybe the public perceives scientists as human when their flaws are exposed making them and the subject at hand relatable and intriguing to the masses.  With the scientific world connected, I think I need to change and become a connected science educator for my future students.  While I feel like I have this blogging thing down, I need to embrace Twitter, Facebook, Diigo, YouTube, and RSS feeds as a viable method for obtaining and sharing scientific knowledge and findings.  If I don't, maybe (as the article points out) I won't outshine academically.  In a world where jobs are hard to come by (especially in academia), I can't afford not to change.  So here's to making a conscious effort at being "plugged-in" to the new and changing technologies out there.  That way, when I do teach students...I will already know various ways to connect with them and hopefully make science exciting for all.            

How I Realized Tagging and Social Bookmarking Is Important!

This week in GRAD602 we discussed social bookmarking and tagging.  To be incredibly honest, I had never given these social media practices much thought in the past.  Until this class and a personal experience in reading a blog with horrible tagging practices, I didn't think these practices were of much use.  Together, they changed my outlook on social bookmarking and tagging.  Here's how I came to this revelation....

For some time now as part of my daily leisurely reading, I follow fashion blogs.  Every once and a while, there is an outfit that sticks out in my mind and I remember it well.  Earlier last week, I wanted to find a particular outfit that stuck out in my mind on this fashion blog I follow.  I knew that blog post was from months ago.  The blogger had tags, but I couldn't locate that blog post using those tags.  Finally, after searching back through months of posts, I found what I was looking for.  At the time, I was annoyed it took so long to find what I wanted, but thought I was the problem and must have been searching incorrectly.  It wasn't until class later in the week that I realized why it took me so long to locate the past blog post.  The blogger's tags were too generic.  She needed to be more specific.  Had she been more specific and straightforward, I would have located it immediately.  Instead, I had to search multiple tags hoping it was located in there (which it wasn't) and ultimately gave up and decided looking through the archives was a smarter and more efficient way to go.

Prior to my experience of reading a blog with horrible tagging practices and this class, I thought these social media practices were not useful to a science researcher or educator.  But, my eyes were opened.  For instance, as a research scientist, we need to be able to recall papers and data quickly that relate to your particular project.  Unless you have a photographic memory, this is hard to do.  I think Diigo is an excellent way to organize all that information.  I had never even heard of Diigo before.  So, when I learned about it in class I was amazed and immediately thought "wished I had used this during my Ph.D. work!" Plus, an added bonus is letting a colleague or student access the folder in order to share information and knowledge.  Additionally, if trying to locate something as trivial as an old fashion blog post made me incredibly frustrated because the blogger had horrible tagging practices, then it made me re-evaluate a student's frustration when they want to recall a blog post on a particular subject matter that might not be so easy to recall.  Having good tags would help alleivate the problem and make the student less frustrated in the long run when trying to recall past subject matter.  Together, a "real-world" example and GRAD602, made me realize that tagging and social bookmarking is incredibly important.             

Dying to Ask A Science Question? Ask Your Science Teacher Via Twitter, Facebook, or Other Social Media Outlets!

This week in GRAD602, we discussed the use of networked communication in the classroom.  While I have always equated Facebook and Twitter accounts as a means for sharing personal information only, I have never considered their use in disseminating important scientific findings to the masses.  So, I decided to fire up Google and search important scientific events that have been broadcasted to the public via social media.  This particular article in the NY Times highlights two important scientific events of 2012

The Mars Rover Landing

(Photo Courtesy of NASA.gov)

-and-

Felix Baumgartner's jump from 24 miles above the Earth 

as two examples of scientific events that went viral via Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube.  So, if NASA can embrace Facebook, why can't science teachers?  Because many teachers probably feel that being linked via social media to their students oversteps some boundaries, I think it is important to highlight ways in which social media can enhance learning in a science class.  For instance, here are some ways to use a closed Facebook page in a science classroom:

1) Create polls for students to participate in

2) Send out information to the whole class about important deadlines

3) Disseminate articles to the class

4) Creat classroom discussion boards

5) Post practice exam questions

6) Ask for feedback on exams, lectures, and other classroom activities

7) Create a question board and have both the students and the teacher respond to it

8) Add links to scientific blogs

Similarly, Twitter accounts and the use of hashtags can also be used in the classroom.  However, Twitter usage might be more restricted to disseminating information and asking/answering questions due to the constraint of the 140 characters.  Overall, social media as a means to engage and inspire students is appealing because so many people already use these types of media outlets daily.  Therefore, if a student had a burning science question but didn't feel comfortable asking it during class, then there would be social media outlets for the student to take advantage of for clarification.  In the end, if social media can reach one student and help them learn more about science, become inspired, and keep them engaged both in and outside of class, then establishing various social media accounts for a classroom is a must-do for future science educators, including myself!  

Do Undergraduate Science Classes Employ Chickering's 7 Principles?

As an aspiring undergraduate professor (hopefully in Microbiology and Immunology), I have been reflecting on how typical undergraduate science classes use Chickering's 7 Principles.  Where can they improve?  What principles are not being addressed?

At my undergraduate university, Appalachian State, every science class had two parts: the lecture and the laboratory section.  Looking back and reflecting, it seems the lecture part of the class missed the mark when it came to addressing the 7 Principles.  Basic courses had 100+ students in them.  With this class size, many principles fell by the wayside.  For example:

1) Larger class size often does not encourage student-faculty contact.  In my larger science classes, it was up to individual students to seek professor interaction rather than the professor initiating the contact.  Most of the interactions involved asking a question in class.

2 and 3) The lectures mainly consisted of powerpoints; while the assignments came in the form of multiple choice, short answers, and essay tests that were purely memorization.   There was no cooperation among students or active learning.

7) Because most professors only used powerpoint, different styles of teaching were not presented in order to engage students who have different ways of learning.

To sum up, the lecture part of the course only employed 3 of the 7 Principles.  Those 3 that were addressed in the class, could in some form be linked to the syllabus.  Needless to say, the lecture part missed the mark!

The lab section is a different story...

It addresses 6 out of the 7 Principles.  Here are the ones it addresses:

1) Because the lab is hands-on, students have many questions.  Therefore, professors are present in the lab, walking around, answering questions, and would show hands-on examples in class.

2) Labs were performed with partners.  Therefore, students were forced to interact with each other and to interact with a group sitting next to them, especially if reagents were shared.

3) A hands-on laboratory is active learning.  The student must complete an experiment in order to get a final answer.  The labs often relate to the lecture.  Therefore, a lecture they had received solely by powerpoint earlier in the week, they now get to apply the lecture to a "real world" example.

4, 5, and 6) Good laboratory practices involve taking excellent notes and keeping a well organized notebook.  Laboratory classes required notebooks to be graded by the professors.  4) Professors would grade and give feedback on the quality of the notebook.  5) Because the notebook was used each week during lab, students were required to turn them in on time, and professors had to grade them and return them before the next class.  6)  From the start, professors emphasize a good, meticulously kept notebook because the validity of the experiments come from what is written in the notebook.  Therefore, high expectations in how a notebook was kept was always emphasized and enforced.

However, the 7th Principle is not addressed.  Because the lab is solely hands-on, it does not reach the students who might perform well at hands-on tasks.

In conclusion (sorry this has been so long), I think that lecture science classes need to be improved.  As a future educator in science, I need to start thinking about how to make scientific lectures more engaging, more relatable, and present the material in a method to reach all types of learners in the audience.