Genomics Education Partnership:

First implementation in a Molecular Biology CourseMay-June 2014

Ana Maria Barral

National University, CA.

National University• Private, non-profit university (1971)

• Comprehensive: Associate, Bachelors, & Masters Degrees

• 19 campuses in CA, administrative offices in San Diego

• Accelerated courses (4-8 weeks), one at a time.

• Mostly non-traditional students: • Working students, often with families• Returning students• Veterans & active military• Minorities

San Diego Spectrum campus

• Part of the BS Biology sequence, follows Genetics

• 8 week lecture + lab, GEP implemented for lab

• Total of 10 class meetings, 4.5 hours each (lab).

• Although 10-12 hours of annotation were planned, total hours spent in-class were 20-25 hours, plus student individual time.

• Lecture included a scaffolded written project on a Drosophila gene to support the GEP project.

GEP in a Molecular Biology lab course (BIO407A)

Course scheduleWeek Lecture GEP Traditional Molecular Bio

1 Nucleic acids.Genes

Dilutions, spectroph.DNA quantification

2 Gene structure Examples using Drosophila Colony PCRSequencing, Blast analysis

3 Genes & clusters Examples using Drosophila. DNA isolation & electrophoresis.

4 Gene evolution. Chromosomes & chromatin.

Intro to GEP.Blast tutorial and exercise.

5 Replication, recombination, & repair.

Annotation exercises. Simple annotation problem. Claiming of contigs.

Blue-white cloning

6 Transcription Annotation

7 Translation Annotation

8 Gene regulation Project submission.

GEP material was incorporated into final exam

The bad…• No TA for a class of 12

• Student complaints:• Instructions confusing • Tutorials difficult and wordy• Excessive workload• Too much emphasis on annotation within the course material

• Interestingly, end-of-course survey scores were better for lab (GEP) than for lecture!

• Student preparation and effort directly proportional to annotation success (systematic issue w/non-traditional students)

Ideas for improvement…• TA/peer instructor invaluable.

• Start GEP content from the very beginning (teach MolBio through GEP- great idea)

• Chunking of materials, short tutorials.

• Formatting of tutorials for easier overview (fonts, bolding, headings, etc.), maybe have instructions separate from in-deep analysis

• Have students work together on the same contig.

Additional observations

• “So are we working for free for Washington University?” Lack of clarity about research and project ownership.

• Desire for more visual aids and help videos (youtube generation)

• GEP project abstract- it may be useful to put faces to names (Welcome video by GEP group?)

The Good• Student engagement was palpable.

• Student surveys scored high (>4) for critical thinking, deeper knowledge of the material, apply the knowledge to real life.

• “It was refreshing to have a professor give me the opportunity to work on such a meaningful task like the WU project. Even though it was extremely challenging at times, it was nice to know that I was working for something more than just a grade.”

Thank you all, especially Sally and Wilson !