Exploring Transmedia: The Rip-Mix-Learn ClassroomLucille A. Benedict,*,† David T. Champlin,‡ and Harry E. Pence§

†Department of Chemistry, University of Southern Maine, Portland, Maine 04104, United States‡Biology Department, University of Southern Maine, Portland, Maine 04104, United States§Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, SUNY College at Oneonta, Oneonta, New York 13820, United States

ABSTRACT: Google Docs was used to create the rip-mix-learn(RML) classroom in two, first-year undergraduate introductorychemistry and biology courses, a second-semester introductorychemistry course, and an upper-level developmental biology course.This “transmedia” approach assigned students to create sets ofcollaborative lecture notes into which they inserted student-generated, Web-based media annotations. Students felt this helpedthem to reinforce concepts and create connections between contentand topics with which they could personally relate. Grading of the annotations was accomplished simply by examining therevision history in Google Docs. Student-annotated lecture notes became part of the required material covered on exams.

KEYWORDS: First-Year Undergraduate/General, Chemoinformatics, Computer-Based Learning, Internet/Web-Based Learning,Student-Centered Learning

■ INTRODUCTION

According to the Pew Research Center, the combination ofwidespread access to broadband Internet connectivity, the popular-ity of social networking, and the near ubiquity of mobile computingis producing a fundamentally new kind of learner. Sometimes calledan “mLearner”, where “m” stands for mobility, this new type oflearner exhibits an ability and willingness to be a content creatorrather than a student who simply absorbs material and reproduces iton an examination.1 Lee Rainie, Director of the Pew ResearchCenter’s Internet and American Life Project, has said:1

Links have changed the way knowledge is presented; it’s nolonger linear. It’s sometimes disrupted, scattered, and relatedto multimedia. There are ways now in the linkedenvironment to pack more information into textbooks andother learning vehicles. You can do story telling in ways nowthat you never could.

This suggests a classroom model that is much different fromtraditional teaching.Henry Jenkins coined the term “transmedia” in his book,

Convergence Culture.2 Jenkins describes transmedia as follows:2

The flow of content across multiple media platforms, thecooperation between multiple media industries, and themigratory behavior of media audiences who will go almostanywhere in search of the kinds of entertainment experiencesthey want.

Thus, transmedia starts with a basic narrative, which thenbecomes the basis for the addition of independent annotationsthat incorporate various media. The classic example is theMatrix movies, which have been embellished by fans to expandthe original story in new directions that are still related to theoriginal plot. The Matrix example cited by Jenkins includedshort videos, augmented reality games, and comic books oranime.

Pence has argued that one way to use transmedia for teachingwould be for the instructor to create a framework for a topic,then allow students to annotate that narrative with multimediamaterial they provide.3 Blogs usually consist of a series ofcomments only loosely connected to each other, and so blogsoftware is probably not particularly appropriate for transmedia.Wikis normally lack the initial overall narrative, so althoughWiki software may be used for transmedia, this is not usuallythe case. There are some examples in which Wikipedia has beenused as a framework for student additions,4,5 but this is stillsomewhat different from true transmedia. Benedict and Penceused student-created videos for instructions on how to usecertain instruments, but this also lacked the overall narrativethat would have made it transmedia.4 Goggle Docs, which isnow a component of Google Drive, seems to be the bestsoftware to support importation of the annotations studentscreate using the World Wide Web into a preexisting narrative,namely, a basic set of class notes. Spaeth and Black have usedGoogle Docs to guide students through the steps of acollaborative laboratory exercise, but their students did notadd graphics or other media.5 Ideally, creating annotations willalso provide opportunities to introduce students to theconcepts and principles of identifying, analyzing, and judgingthe diversity of information sources now available.

■ PROJECT DESCRIPTION

The rip-mix-learn (RML) classroom in this project hadstudents in biology and chemistry courses create sets ofcollaborative lecture notes that incorporated Web-based mediacontent to help reinforce concepts and create connectionsbetween course content and topics with which students could

Published: August 29, 2013

Article

pubs.acs.org/jchemeduc

© 2013 American Chemical Society andDivision of Chemical Education, Inc. 1172 dx.doi.org/10.1021/ed300853g | J. Chem. Educ. 2013, 90, 1172−1176

personally relate. Google Docs was used to create and share thenotes with all the students in the course. To produce theframework at the beginning of the semester, the instructorcreated a document for each lecture on Google Docs and allstudents were given viewing access. (Note: Google Docs is nowa part of Google Drive.) As the course progressed, assignedstudents were given access to edit the appropriate document.Students in both the chemistry and biology courses produced aset of lecture notes for which they wrote portions or all of thematerial and annotated the content with images, videos, Websites, or simulations they found on the Internet. The instructorhad access to the document’s revision history and could therebygrade each student. The instructors referenced the notes andannotations during subsequent lectures. Exams were based onthe assigned textbook material and also the annotated lecturenotes, including Web sites used for annotations. Consequently,exam questions came from material contributed by both theinstructor and students.The RML classroom was created for two first-semester

introductory chemistry and biology courses, a second-semesterintroductory chemistry course, and an upper-level develop-mental biology course. The first-semester and second-semesterintroductory courses host 65−120 students a semester rangingfrom first-year students to those in their last year, with a varietyof STEM majors represented, including chemistry, biology,environmental science, computer science, engineering, andphysics. The first-semester courses also fulfill the general educationrequirement for a science course with lab; thus, many of thestudents were undeclared or nonmajors. The developmentalbiology course has 30 students and is an advanced course thatbiology majors typically take during their last year.The RML classroom was incorporated into all four courses as

part of a larger transformation. Course development supportwas provided by a National Science Foundation award toincrease access for students with disabilities through universaldesign for learning methods and to support their pursuit ofcareers in STEM fields.

Variations of RML in the Chemistry Classroom

To implement the RML classroom into the general chemistrycourses, the instructor had students annotate and expand onlecture notes that were created and uploaded by the instructorto Google Docs. In each course, students were divided intogroups (20−30 students per group) and each group wasrequired to annotate the notes twice during the semester. Eachstudent had one week to choose a topic and add an annotationwith a description. An annotation consisted of a video, image,diagram, simulation or Web site that correlated to the section ofnotes the students had chosen. For the general chemistrycourses, the students were given only an outline for the coursenotes and they were required to write the notes for the sectionthat they chose as well as add two referenced annotations to theirnotes. Box 1 gives an example of annotations from the first-semester general chemistry courses. As in the example, studentsinserted “annotation” at the beginning of each annotation theyinserted into the lecture notes in order to help other studentsidentify material created by their classmates.

Implementing RML in the Biology Classroom

To implement the RML classroom into biology courses, acalendar was posted on the course Web site at the beginning ofthe semester and for each lecture date, three student note takersand three student annotators were listed. Lectures wererecorded and posted on the course Web site for one week,

during which time student completed the assignment even ifthey had missed the class. After one week, the recorded lectureswere removed from the Web site, although the annotatedlecture notes remained available for the entire semester. As inthe chemistry courses, annotations consisted of a video, image,diagram, simulation, or Web site that correlated to the sectionof notes the students had chosen. Traditional communicationbetween students outside of Google Docs was not necessary, asstudents could dynamically view one another’s revisions,notations and comments within the assignment. If a studentaccessed the file to add a notation, but saw that another studentor students had already done so, then the assignment was tocontinue document revision by inserting additional notations orediting the other entries for further refinement of the assignment.The annotated lecture notes and textbook assignments became thebasis for the exams. Each student had access to all the annotatedlecture notes and could study them on Google Docs or downloadthem to their computer in the Adobe Portable Document Format,PDF. Boxes 2 and 3 give examples of annotations created by

students for the lecture notes in the introductory biology courseand the developmental biology course.Depending on the semester, there were two ways the

annotation assignment was done for the three students assigned

Box 1. Example of Student Notes and Annotation for aGeneral Chemistry Course

When two chemicals react with one another, we can write thisreaction using a balanced chemical equation. A balancedchemical equation utilizes the law of conservation of matter,which states that matter can neither be created nor destroyed.This theory was introduced in the 18th century by AntoineLavoisier. Therefore, before and after a reaction, we will havethe same amounts of particles and the same mass.6

http://shysterball.blogspot.com/2008/03/brian-sabean-alchemist.html

The chemicals involved in a reaction are known as reactantsand products. The reactants are the original chemicals that aremixed together. The products are what is produced from thereaction of the reactants.7

http://www.mhhe.com/physsci/chemistry/chang7/esp/folder_structure/cr/m1/s2/index.htm

If an equation does not add up, we can balance it. This isdone by changing the ratio of the atoms, molecules, or formulaunits. This number goes before the chemical composition inour formulas. These are known as stoichiometric coefficients.They balance the relationship between reactants and products.This relationship is stoichiometry.

Box 2. Example of Student Notes and Annotation for aGeneral Chemistry Course

Since we have been talking about ATP, I was curious abouthow much ATP we use everyday. An average human adultused 200−300 mols of ATP in a day. Also, because there isonly 0.1 mols of ATP active in the body at any time, it must becreated and recycled from 2000 to 3000 times per day. ATP isnever a storage molecule, so each time it is created, it isimmediately used.8

http://www.bodybuilding.com/fun/drobson24.htm

Journal of Chemical Education Article

dx.doi.org/10.1021/ed300853g | J. Chem. Educ. 2013, 90, 1172−11761173

to annotate each lecture. One way was for the assignment to becompleted during the week following the lecture. The otherwas to do it during the week before the lecture. For both ways,students added their annotation to the Google Docs document,but the latter approach also included giving a 3-minpresentation of their material to the class. The studentpresentations included various combinations of PowerPointslides, Web sites, or demonstrations. In every case, though,material from the Internet was included because that was arequired part of the assignment. After class, each studentinserted a paragraph description, including URLs, into thelecture notes document on Google Docs.

■ ASSESSMENTStudents completed the assignments in the RML classroom at ahigh frequency. In the introductory courses, 92% of biologystudents and 95% of chemistry students completed theannotation assignments, and 100% of the students in theadvanced course completed the annotation assignments. Theintroductory courses are notable because in a preassessmentsurvey, only 58% of the biology students and 46% of thechemistry students reported having used Google Docs before.As student ownership of the material increased, scores andwork quality increased. Prior to implementing the RMLClassroom, a comparable annotation assignment was used inthe introductory course except the assignment was simplyturned in for credit. Only 73% of those students completed theassignment, in comparison with 92% in the RML Classroom.The quality of the work also improved. Scores averaged 80%when turned in for credit, while the average score for theGoogle Docs work was 96%. When the annotation assignmentwas coupled with a classroom presentation, more studentscompleted the Google Docs work than the presentation, 94%and 83%, respectively. Interestingly, when the annotationassignment was coupled with a classroom presentation, all thestudents included their names as part of the annotation theyinserted into the Google Docs lecture notes, while only 17%had included their names during a previous semester when theclassroom presentation was not part of the course.Participation in the RML classroom assignments was high for

all students. For example, when students were divided into two

groups based on whether or not they had completed at least80% of the required quiz assignments during the semester, finalgrades were quite different (average GPAs of 3.34 and 2.21,respectively), but completion of the annotation assignment wasvirtually the same (94% and 91%, respectively). In other words,participation in the RML Classroom was particularly effective inengaging students who might not otherwise complete assign-ments and participate in the course.Exams were based in part on material created by students. Of

course, that is a concern in science courses where contentaccuracy is absolutely essential. If needed, instructors can revisematerial in Google Docs. The instructor can edit and add aclarifying note while choosing to remain anonymous or addingtheir name. However, perhaps the most striking findingreported here is the quality of materials created by students.For example, during one semester of an introductory biologysection with over 80 students involved, only three correctionsor clarifications were added by the instructor to the annotatedlecture notes. Indeed, rather than frustrating time spent by theinstructor correcting student contributions, student-generatedannotations often became part of the instructor’s lecturematerial in subsequent semesters. In an initial comparison,annotations created by students one semester were comparedto presenting the material as part of the instructor’s lecture thenext time the course was taught. For both semesters, the samethree questions were asked about the material on exams. Theaverage percentage correct for the three questions in the firstsemester and second semester was 64 and 60%, respectively, inthe introductory course, and 78 and 69%, respectively, in theadvanced course. Thus, in this brief comparison, studentsperformed at least as well when the material was presented by aclassmate annotator as by the instructor. Student-generated lecturenotes and annotations were found to provide excellent material forexam questions. In looking back at the course exams, morequestions were found to have come specifically from examples inthe annotated lecture notes than from the textbook.Pre- and postassessment questionnaires were administered

on the first and last day of each semester. In the preassessmentsurvey, students reported using computing tools and socialmedia at a high frequency for school assignments. For example,when asked to list computer tools they had used to completeassignments with a classmate or lab partner, email, Facebook,and Blackboard were frequently mentioned (60, 35 and 23%,respectively). The preassessment students reported using theInternet at a high frequency similar to how they would be usingit in the RML classroom. Two-thirds of the students used theInternet daily to help them complete school assignments, andone-third used the Internet daily to learn more about schoolmaterial but not as part of a required assignment.Approximately half (54%) of the students reported havingused Google Docs before. When asked to list other courses inwhich Google Docs had been used to complete assignments,students typically listed only one course and nearly all werecollege rather than high school courses. Most students who hadused Google Docs in multiple courses tended to report theywere “very comfortable” with it, while others describedthemselves as “somewhat comfortable” using Google Docs.Interestingly, those who had used Google Docs did not appearparticularly more experienced with using computing tools tocomplete assignments. For example, when asked to listcomputer tools they had used to work collaboratively with aclassmate or lab partner, students who had experience with

Box 3. Example of Student Annotation for a DevelopmentalBiology Course

I looked at information on transgenic mice and I found aYouTube video about transgenic mice. This video is called TheScience of Transgenic Mice and it is in two parts. The first parttalks about how mice are very good model animals becausethey have a very short gestation period of only 3 weeks. Theythen talk about different techniques. The second videocontinues where the first video left off and it then talksabout the difference between knockout and knock-in mice.Transgenic animals are very important because they can beused to study diseases in humans.9

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ujZHrR1mro8

Below I pasted a great link that provides more informationabout transgenic mice since it is a very interesting topic! Thelink I pasted below gives a great description of transgenicstrains and gene targeting related to knock out mice.10

http://www.animalresearch.info/en/science/animalsused/mouseGM

Journal of Chemical Education Article

dx.doi.org/10.1021/ed300853g | J. Chem. Educ. 2013, 90, 1172−11761174

Google Docs were about equally likely as others to have usedFacebook or email to complete previous assignments.On the postassessment survey, students were supportive of

the RML classroom approach. Spending more time on a topictends to increase student understanding; in addition, if studentsenjoy an activity, they are also more likely to spend that extratime. Table 1 focuses on the responses in the first-semester

introductory chemistry course. Notably, only one questionfrom one student received a “Strongly Disagree” response. Themost positive score was in response to whether the studentswould recommend the course in its current format. The sameday as the postassessment surveys were done, students alsocompleted the university’s course evaluation form. Studentsalso responded favorably to the RML classroom approach onthese. One student wrote, “The assignments made me part ofthe class.” On the other hand, some of the lowest scores on thepostassessment survey came in response to whether the studentplanned to use Google Docs for other course work in thefuture. Perhaps students are just beginning to become familiarwith using tools such as Facebook and Google Docs for schoolassignments. In the preassessment survey, a relatively smallpercentage of students who listed familiarity with Facebook andGoogle Docs had used the media to facilitate completingassignments (35 and 32%, respectively).In the future, it will be exciting to combine new teaching

approaches in science classrooms while collecting a variety ofdata to gauge the success of transmedia approaches in thescience classroom (e.g., attendance, quiz scores, final grades,retention in science courses, etc.).

■ DISCUSSIONThe RML classroom has significant benefits for students byexposing them to a greater variety of knowledge on differenttopics, as well as encouraging them to use the Internet to find,learn, and evaluate scientific principles. Students found theRML classroom assignments to be accessible, engaging, andeducational. It was hoped that having other students depend on

their work would improve the ability of students to identify,analyze, and validate the information sources they used fromthe World Wide Web. This result is hard to measure, althoughthe instructors did feel that the work the students produced wasof higher quality than usual, even for students who wereotherwise not fully engaged or succeeding in the course. Theauthors hope to follow up on this question in subsequent studies.Interestingly, although the assignments did not require students tointeract with each other, an informal survey found that more thanhalf the students contacted other students and workedcollaboratively on the assignments. The students created coursecontent using real-world examples of science principles ofteninvolving such topics as health, exercise, nutrition, and theenvironment, which were directly relevant to themselves and theirclassmates.One of the important factors to consider when developing

any project based on the World Wide Web is the security of theinformation that the students provide. Web sites such asFacebook and LinkedIn solicit a great deal of personal data, andFacebook is notorious for frequently changing the securitysettings to make this information more available to the public.This project avoided these problems because Google did notrequire personal information to set up an account, and thematerial added by the students was viewable only to othermembers of the class.Instructors who are reluctant to try assignments like those

described here might be concerned about implementing theassignments in large, introductory courses, especially as thetools used may be new to many of the students. However, wefound there were almost no technical questions from studentsabout how to complete the assignments. To help reducetechnical questions, detailed descriptions of the assignmentsalong with examples were posted on course Web sites at thebeginning of the semester. Technical problems were also reducedbecause the student e-mail accounts created by the universityhappen to be gmail accounts. Consequently, those addresses couldbe easily used by the instructors for communication andadministration, as well as minimizing issues of student privacy.For example, grading was able to be accomplished simply byexamining the revision history in Google Docs. The only challengefaced seemed to be the currently limited effectiveness of GoogleDocs on mobile devices.

■ CONCLUSIONS

The instructors concluded the student writing in annotatedlecture notes was higher quality than normally seen in thesecourses. We attribute this to the fact the writing was public tothe entire class, and each student was responsible for helpingcreate a set of notes that everyone would use to help them inthe course. It appeared these collaborative efforts also fosteredcommunity in the larger introductory courses, where learningmight otherwise be a sterile and isolating experience. It wasapparent that student engagement and collaboration benefitedsignificantly from this project. The overall student assessmentof this project was quite favorable, and it appears that studentsgreatly benefited. The time required to implement the RMLclassroom was easily offset by the high rate of participation inthe assignments and the high quality of the students’ work.

■ AUTHOR INFORMATION

Corresponding Author

*E-mail: lbenedict@usm.maine.edu.

Table 1. Mean Student Responses from Selected SurveyQuestions

Mean Scoresa (SD)

Statements for ResponseChemistry,N = 46

Biology,N = 23

1. I found the annotations to Google Docs ameaningful learning experience.

4.04 (1.09) 3.95 (1.11)

2. Searching for chemistry-related Web contentfor the annotated notes helped me gain abetter understanding of the coursematerial.

3.61 (0.93) 3.57 (0.95)

3. Writing notes to go along with a topic andadding annotations helped me gain abetter understanding of the coursematerial.

4.20 (0.81) 4.26 (0.81)

4. I will use Google Docs for other courses andgroup work.

3.70 (1.11) 3.65 (1.19)

5. The annotated notes helped me to betterunderstand topic that I found confusing.

3.70 (0.99) 3.70 (1.11)

6. I regularly used the annotated notes to studyfor this course.

3.83 (1.04) 3.83 (1.15)

7. I would recommend that a friend take thiscourse with the current format.

4.57 (0.65) 4.61 (0.58)

aFor each statement, the students were asked to respond by choosingthe closest of the following options: “Strongly disagree” (1);“Disagree” (2); “Neutral” (3); “Agree” (4); or “Strongly agree” (5).

Journal of Chemical Education Article

dx.doi.org/10.1021/ed300853g | J. Chem. Educ. 2013, 90, 1172−11761175

Notes

The authors declare no competing financial interest.

■ ACKNOWLEDGMENTSL.A.B. and D.T.C. received support for curriculum develop-ment in part from National Science Foundation Award No.HRD 0833567.

■ REFERENCES(1) Waters, J. K. Broadband, Social Networks, and Mobility HaveSpawned a New Kind of Learner. THE Journal, Dec. 13, 2011. http://thejournal.com/articles/2011/12/13/broadband-social-networks-and-mobility.aspx?sc_lang=en (accessed Aug 2013).(2) Jenkins, H. Convergence Culture; New York University Press: NewYork, 2006.(3) Pence, H. E. Teaching with Transmedia. J. Educ. Tech. Syst. 2012,40 (2), 131−140.(4) Benedict, L.; Pence, H. E. Teaching Chemistry Using Student-Created Videos and Photo Blogs Accessed with Smartphones andTwo-Dimensional Barcodes. J. Chem. Educ. 2012, 89 (4), 492−496.(5) Spaeth, A. D.; Black, R. S. Google Docs as a Form ofCollaborative Learning. J. Chem. Educ. 2012, 89 (8), 1078−1079.(6) Calcaterra, C. “Brian Sabean, Alchemist.” Shysterball, March 18,2008. http://shysterball.blogspot.com/2008/03/brian-sabean-alchemist.html (accessed Aug 2013).(7) Balancing Chemical Equations. http://www.mhhe.com/physsci/chemistry/chang7/esp/folder_structure/cr/m1/s2/index.htm (ac-cessed Aug 2013).(8) Robson, D. ATP: Energy’s Currency. Bodybuilding.com, June 25,2004. http://www.bodybuilding.com/fun/drobson24.htm (accessedAug 2013).(9) McKinsey, G. The Science of Transgenic Technology, Parts 1and 2. YouTube. HHMI, April 25, 2007. http://www.youtube.com/user/Proneural?feature=watch (accessed Aug 2013).(10) Wells, S. Of Mice and Men. YouTube. Coalition for MedicalProgress and Research Defence Society, October 7, 2011. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zprHU1mvaBo (accessed Aug 2013).

Journal of Chemical Education Article

dx.doi.org/10.1021/ed300853g | J. Chem. Educ. 2013, 90, 1172−11761176