24
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      What’s Downstream? A Set of Classroom Exercises to Help Students Understand Recessive Epistasis

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Undergraduate students in genetics and developmental biology courses often struggle with the concept of epistasis because they are unaware that the logic of gene interactions differs between enzymatic pathways and signaling pathways. If students try to develop and memorize a single simple rule for predicting epistatic relationships without taking into account the nature of the pathway under consideration, they can become confused by cases where the rule does not apply. To remedy this problem, we developed a short pre-/post-test, an in-class activity for small groups, and a series of clicker questions about recessive epistasis in the context of a signaling pathway that intersects with an enzymatic pathway. We also developed a series of homework problems that provide deliberate practice in applying concepts in epistasis to different pathways and experimental situations. Students show significant improvement from pretest to posttest, and perform well on homework and exam questions following this activity. Here we describe these materials, as well as the formative and summative assessment results from one group of students to show how the activities impact student learning.

          Related collections

          Most cited references10

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Combining Peer Discussion with Instructor Explanation Increases Student Learning from In-Class Concept Questions

          Use of in-class concept questions with clickers can transform an instructor-centered “transmissionist” environment to a more learner-centered constructivist classroom. To compare the effectiveness of three different approaches using clickers, pairs of similar questions were used to monitor student understanding in majors’ and nonmajors’ genetics courses. After answering the first question individually, students participated in peer discussion only, listened to an instructor explanation only, or engaged in peer discussion followed by instructor explanation, before answering a second question individually. Our results show that the combination of peer discussion followed by instructor explanation improved average student performance substantially when compared with either alone. When gains in learning were analyzed for three ability groups of students (weak, medium, and strong, based on overall clicker performance), all groups benefited most from the combination approach, suggesting that peer discussion and instructor explanation are synergistic in helping students. However, this analysis also revealed that, for the nonmajors, the gains of weak performers using the combination approach were only slightly better than their gains using instructor explanation alone. In contrast, the strong performers in both courses were not helped by the instructor-only approach, emphasizing the importance of peer discussion, even among top-performing students.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Ordering gene function: the interpretation of epistasis in regulatory hierarchies.

            L. Avery (1992)
            The order of action of genes in a regulatory hierarchy that is governed by a signal can often be determined by the method of epistasis analysis, in which the phenotype of a double mutant is compared with that of single mutants. The epistatic mutation may be in either the upstream or the downstream gene, depending on the nature of the two mutations and the type of regulation. Nevertheless, when the regulatory hierarchy satisfies certain conditions, simple rules allow the position of the epistatic locus in the pathway to be determined without detailed knowledge of the nature of the mutations, the pathway, or the molecular mechanism of regulation.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Does Displaying the Class Results Affect Student Discussion during Peer Instruction?

              The use of personal response systems, or clickers, is increasingly common in college classrooms. Although clickers can increase student engagement and discussion, their benefits also can be overstated. A common practice is to ask the class a question, display the responses, allow the students to discuss the question, and then collect the responses a second time. In an introductory biology course, we asked whether showing students the class responses to a question biased their second response. Some sections of the course displayed a bar graph of the student responses and others served as a control group in which discussion occurred without seeing the most common answer chosen by the class. If students saw the bar graph, they were 30% more likely to switch from a less common to the most common response. This trend was more pronounced in true/false questions (38%) than multiple-choice questions (28%). These results suggest that observing the most common response can bias a student's second vote on a question and may be misinterpreted as an increase in performance due to student discussion alone.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                J Microbiol Biol Educ
                J Microbiol Biol Educ
                JMBE
                Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education : JMBE
                American Society of Microbiology
                1935-7877
                1935-7885
                2013
                02 December 2013
                : 14
                : 2
                : 197-205
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Molecular, Cellular and Developmental Biology, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO 80309-0347
                [2 ]School of Biology and Ecology, Maine Center for Research in STEM Education (RiSE), University of Maine, Orono, ME 04469
                Author notes
                [* ]Corresponding author. Mailing address: Department of Molecular, Cellular and Developmental Biology, Campus Box 347, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO 80309-0347. Phone: 303-735-1949. Fax: 303-492-7744. E-mail: knight@ 123456colorado.edu .
                Article
                jmbe-14-197
                10.1128/jmbe.v14i2.560
                3867757
                de122ed8-cd85-4320-9122-cac022aa4e70
                ©2013 Author(s). Published by the American Society for Microbiology.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the a Creative Commons Attribution – Noncommercial – Share Alike 3.0 Unported License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/), which permits unrestricted non-commercial use and distribution, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                Categories
                Curriculum

                Comments

                Comment on this article