Archives

Abstract

With support from a SENCER Post-Institute Implementation sub-award grant, seven faculty members from six different disciplines began a collaborative partnership to design joint curricular projects across courses and departments on the theme of Food for Thought. To meet our goals, we developed shared learning outcomes for students in courses in the Food for Thought cluster, using SENCER goals as a guide for our work. In order to address those outcomes, we crafted a variety of projects engaging students from two or more courses. We implemented these projects in our courses and assessed student perceptions of learning and student performance in integrative learning. In this article we detail the challenges and benefits of ongoing interdisciplinary collaboration, as well as how this group of faculty members balanced other demands of academia. We conclude with a discussion of our assessment methodology and findings of improved learning.

Introduction

In most of our academic lives as faculty, many of us are used to, and perhaps even prefer, working alone. We can easily empathize with our students who complain about the hazards and time drain that they experience doing group work in classes. Some of us might go so far as to say we’d rather go it alone than ever have to adjust to planning our teaching with others. After all, when we do it alone, course planning can take place in the wee hours, does not require multiple meetings, and affords us the greatest flexibility and control over what happens in the classroom. In spite of this tendency to be quite content to “go it alone,” our group of seven faculty members has spent the last eight years in a collaborative partnership designing joint curricular projects across courses, departments, and university divisions on the theme of Food for Thought. We work in diverse disciplines— Biology, Chemistry, Economics, Sociology, Spanish, and Health and Wellness— and together we have created numerous projects involving as few as two and as many as five courses that engage students with the science, politics, and human elements of food production, distribution, and consumption. We have not only implemented these multidisciplinary projects in our courses, we have also assessed student perceptions of learning and student performance in integrative learning achieved from this focused, yet multidisciplinary teaching. And while our efforts have taken time and energy, we have evidence, both from our multiple modes of assessment of the effects on students and from the rewards we have experienced teaching in these contexts, that mindfully planned collaboration has important benefits for our work with students.

Our motivation for doing this work occurs in a larger context in which, for more than a decade, universities and colleges across the United States have been newly articulating the value and purpose of undergraduate education. One outcome of this self-interrogation has been a renewed focus on integrative learning and new efforts to work towards assuring that undergraduates leave college with a sense of the complexities of social, scientific, technical, and environmental problems, and with an understanding that problem-solving requires multiple perspectives. In 2004, for example, Carol Geary Schneider, president of the Association of American Colleges and Universities (AAC&U), called for integrative approaches to become more central to the enterprise of education, in order combat the “fragmentation of knowledge” (Schneider 2004). AAC&U has taken on several initiatives related to these concerns, including issues of implementation and assessment (Huber et al. 2007; Ferren et al. 2014/2015). Our work was inspired by our participation in a Summer Institute sponsored by The Science Education for New Civic Engagements and Responsibilities (SENCER), an NSF-funded organization whose focus echoes these concerns about integrative education. Its SENCER Ideals include “robustly connect[ing] science and civic engagement by teaching ‘through’ complex, contested, capacious, current, and unresolved public issues ‘to’ basic science” (SENCER 2015).

In this essay, we share our experiences with collaboration in planning, implementing, and assessing cross-course projects that, when experienced by students especially over several semesters, lead to enhanced integrative, interdisciplinary learning. In this context, we define our teaching efforts as multidisciplinary, because projects are approached from each faculty member’s traditional disciplinary area of expertise. We argue that a viable approach to the goal of promoting citizen science (science broadly accessible to informed citizens) is to draw on the strengths of multiple experts from more than one discipline, rather than retraining ourselves in realms of expertise that are not our own. Yet we also describe and demonstrate that student learning from this approach is integrative and interdisciplinary, as students are better able to synthesize content and make connections between multiple disciplines. If the goal of a “SENCERized” curriculum is to help students learn science and its relevance to and limitations in a range of public issues and in solving complex problems of interest to students, we argue that we enhance these goals by bringing in multiple disciplinary perspectives with real representatives of those lenses. If we forgo “going it alone,” we bring more context and connection to civic issues and provide a model of civic engagement for our students.

Cross-Class Collaboration to Promote Interdisciplinary Learning

In 2006, with the help of a SENCER Post-Institute Implementation sub-award grant used to provide faculty summer stipends for planning, we embarked on a path of collaboration, creating a cluster of courses focused on developing the student as an informed consumer of food by providing a platform for discussion of what we eat, why we eat, where our food comes from and its journey from production to consumption, and how food affects our bodies and health. As faculty from across the university in natural sciences, social sciences, and humanities, we sought to create a set of offerings that would meet a multidisciplinary general education requirement by inviting our students to recognize and appreciate the different ways that our disciplines were concerned with issues of food. We hoped to encourage students to recognize ways in which human bodies and societies are interlinked by numerous processes, many of which can be understood by investigating the dynamics of food in chemical, biological, cultural, and social systems. Our primary goal for students was to create an enhanced, interdisciplinary understanding of the interplay of these systems and a more attuned sense of how food is a civic issue.

To meet our goals, we developed a set of shared learning outcomes (Table 1) for students in courses in the Food for Thought cluster. We based these on SENCER Ideals of civic engagement, focusing on contested issues and encouraging student engagement through multidisciplinary perspectives, as a guide for our work of demonstrating to our students the value and interconnectedness of natural sciences, social sciences, and humanities disciplines. In order to address those outcomes, over the years we have crafted a variety of projects that students from two or more courses engage in as part of the requirements of those courses. Many of these projects included community organizations. Some of the projects and activities required funding external to our departmental budgets, especially those that involved the preparation and sharing of food and those that required travel. In many semesters, we also offered our students out-of-class experiential learning opportunities such as guest speakers, movie screenings, or farm tours.

Each semester’s projects and the level of collaboration and coordination varied according to which courses were offered that particular semester. During the first years of the cluster, we created large-scale projects such as the Harvest Bounty Shared Meal and the Food and Nutrition Guidelines, which included every cluster course taught that semester. These projects required students to work in small teams (four to eight students) with students in several other classes. Highly coordinated, large-scale projects required intensive time preparation and collaboration between four to seven different faculty members (often including faculty who were not teaching a cluster course but who helped with project coordination) and our students.

Given the desire to continue meaningful projects, while recognizing the other demands of academia, in later years we created small-scale, yet still intensive, cross-course projects by partnering two or three classes and faculty members, who facilitated coordination when necessary. All projects, regardless of the scale or number of classes or students, involved a presentational component (i.e., students sharing and/or creating information to be shared with either community members or students in another class). To further simplify, we sometimes asked students to work in teams with their own classmates rather than in teams with students from other classes, thereby reducing the need for facilitated, extensive, out-of-class meetings. Most recently, we have been able to organize these coordinated small-scale projects into a showcase-style larger event held once an academic year, such as the Food Day event or the Festival of Dionysus in the Mountain South event. These projects, and other projects implemented over the past eight years, are summarized by semester in Table 2. Supplementary campus and community activities intended to enhance student experience with food, food systems, and culture are also included in Table 2.

To illustrate the difference between the multi-course large-scale projects and some more manageable small-scale projects, we offer four examples. The Food and Nutrition Guidelines Policy Project was offered three times between 2007 and 2009. In the 2008 version of this large-scale project, students studying Food Politics were organized into two committees charged with overseeing the development of guidelines for UNC Asheville; one committee focused on food guidelines and the other focused on nutrition guidelines. These students became experts in a specific food or nutrition topic and then drafted and discussed with each other a recommendation in their area of expertise. The committees then received oral or written suggestions from students in the other Food for Thought cluster classes, discussed all the guidelines as a committee, and then each produced a set of proposed guidelines for our campus. Students studying Nutrition, individually or in teams of two, prepared written comments on a specific topic related to food (local, organically grown, genetic modification, waste reduction, etc.) or nutrition (achieving healthy weight, fat, sugar, salt, fiber, whole foods, etc.). Working in small groups (three to four students), students studying Food of Chemistry measured the amount of sodium in several different foods offered in the dining hall, and students studying Land Economics developed evidence-based arguments for local or organic food, specific procurement strategies, and changes to the UNC Asheville food environment. All classes presented their analyses, guidelines and recommendations to the Food Politics student committees, typically as both writ- ten and oral recommendations, for inclusion in the food guidelines. The Food Politics students then formatted the data, recommendations, and rationale from the other courses into an eighty-page document and presented their findings to campus decision-makers in December 2008. Approximately 120 people were involved (including 100 students and 20 members of the campus community including faculty, administration, and Dining Services staff), and classes met jointly at least three times over the term. Campus dining services responded by making a series of changes to their food purchasing and labeling that have largely been in place since that time. Based on their post-project reflections, Food Politics students reported that they had a sense of empowerment from participating in this ambitious effort with tangible policy change implications.

Another example of a large-scale cross-course project was the Plants, Nutrition, and Latino Food and Culture Project in Spring 2011, which involved courses from three different disciplines: Biology, Health and Wellness, and Foreign Languages. Student groups from each of the three courses were assigned a Plant of the Americas, designated by the Plants and Humans instructor as native to the Americas, and worked together to create a joint poster presentation for the UNC Asheville Undergraduate Research Symposium. Students researched each plant through the lens of their particular discipline, participated in a workshop on abstract writing, and attended a panel discussion by local food experts who use these plants in their restaurants. They then created the final posters that included botanical information (Plants and Humans students), nutritional information about the plant (Nutrition students), and a traditional recipe along with relevant cultural information (Spanish students). Additionally, students studying Nutrition completed a nutritional analysis of the chosen recipe, and students studying Spanish created a summary in Spanish of basic plant information shared by their peers to accompany the bilingual recipe; the posters were also shared with a YWCA Latino health program. Campus and community members were invited to learn about and taste the foods prepared, and students were evaluated on their presentations. Students from each course had to navigate group work within their own course as well as coordinate preparing the poster with groups from other courses. At the Symposium, students reported learning much more about the plant because of the collaboration with students from other disciplines.

A third example of a large-scale project involved three classes: Pathophysiology of Chronic Conditions and Illnesses, Sociology of Gender, and Health Communications. Students generated evidence-based and socially aware health recommendations for the YWCA’s Diabetes Wellness and Prevention Program. This project engaged students with underserved populations in the Western North Carolina region and empowered people living with diabetes with practical information about their chronic condition. The Pathophysiology students synthesized the complex science underlying type 2 diabetes for students in the two other courses. Sociology of Gender students examined the scientific messages for evidence of bias and considered how health messages are presented in the media. Finally, Health Communications students worked to optimize the health message for people in the community who were living with diabetes and who had varied educational backgrounds. The final products from students in the Pathophysiology and Gender courses were poster presentations with various perspectives on diabetes. Health Communication students presented their social marketing campaign strategies to the YWCA Diabetes Prevention Program Coordinator orally, and in writing to the students in the other classes. Students in all three classes were highly motivated to translate their knowledge to help others better understand and prevent this very challenging disease. This unique opportunity allowed students to practice educating people from diverse backgrounds about relevant health topics. Additionally, students were offered immediate and meaningful feedback on their instruction from their audience.

An example of a small-scale cross-course project involved two courses, Economics of Food and Plants and Humans, and focused on the topic of economic and environmental sustainability of campus food production. Students studying biology (Plants and Humans) were assigned vegetable crops to grow in the campus organic garden. Each student wrote a research paper that explored the tradeoffs of some aspect of organic food production (e.g., heirloom vs. hybrid seeds, sustainable methods to amend the soil, or the tradeoffs of land-extensive vs. land-intensive cultivation methods). The students studying biology were then combined into groups of four to give presentations to the students studying economics that summarized the results from their research papers as well as the results of their garden project, including the yield of the crops they grew. This information was used by students in the Economics of Food class to finalize their analysis of the costs and benefits of campus food production and consumption. Groups of students in the Economics of Food class investigated several topics such as the time, money, and resource costs; legal and logistical issues; marketing; and revenue potential (cost savings) associated with food produced on campus and either sold on campus or used to replace food that is currently purchased. At the end of the term, students enrolled in the Economics of Food class presented the results of their analysis to the students enrolled in Plants and Humans and to campus administrators. Reflection assignments revealed that students in both classes learned a great deal not just about their assigned topic but also about the environmental and economic issues associated with campus food production. One telling feature of these reflections was that a great number of students reported learning that these issues were much more complex than they initially believed.

Even though we have interpreted our class feedback from students on cross-class projects of these types as positive, we also strove from the beginning of our collaborative teaching endeavors to objectively determine the effectiveness of this type of instruction and the student learning gains from engagement in cross-course projects. To this end, we have implemented numerous modes of assessment, which are described below.

Assessment of the Food for Thought Cluster Pedagogy

Since the inception of the Food for Thought cluster, we have worked together to assess whether cross-course projects and cluster activities impact student learning, using a variety of assessment methods (Wingert et al. 2011 and 2014). Our first assessment strategy utilized an adapted version of SENCER’s Student Assessment of their Learning Gains (SALG) instrument. Since the SALG is designed for individual STEM courses, rather than for a cluster of courses across disciplines, we developed an instrument designed to measure the Food for Thought cluster learning outcomes (Table 1). Our adapted SALG was used as an entrance (start of semester) and exit (end of semester) survey instrument administered electronically using a quiz form in an internet-based course management system (Moodle).

The entrance and exit assessment surveys had sixty-one items, including eight demographic questions, one open-ended question, and fifty-two questions addressing learning outcomes and course mechanics using a five-point Likert scale. 106 students completed both surveys. The learning outcomes questions were organized into four parts: academic attitudes; civic engagement and informed consumer; interdisciplinary and disciplinary skills; and understanding of food, food systems, food choices, and social and biological relationships (Table 1). At the end of each survey students were also asked to answer the following open-ended question: “Please list three food issues that interest you most.” Students were asked to list three entries in order to complete the survey.

Results from this first assessment demonstrated that our collaborative, multidisciplinary approach using cross-course projects across cluster courses led to statistically significant increases in student perceptions of their learning gains, especially related to civic engagement (effect size (∆) = 8.0%; p = 0.036), food literacy (∆ = 13.8%; p < 0.0001), research literacy (∆ = 9.7%; p = 0.0018), information and communication skills (∆ = 9.2%; p = 0.0003), and understanding food systems (∆ = 14.2%; p< 0.0001). We attributed much of the positive change in students’ evaluation of their learning to the cross-course projects and activities. Qualitative analysis of the open-ended questions revealed that students’ interest in and engagement with food issues increased over the course of the semester, especially with respect to changing the food production and consumption systems related to the American diet (Wingert et al. 2011).

In a second assessment, we sought to extend our findings on students’ perceptions of learning gains by assessing the cluster’s impact on student learning, specifically regarding integrative learning across disciplines (Wingert et al. 2014). We focused on three of our student learning outcomes (Table 1) that require integrative learning: civic engagement, informed consumer, and food systems and choices. Specifically, we tested whether exposure to a focused, multidisciplinary learning environment (the Food for Thought cluster courses and activities), could result in integrative, interdisciplinary learning gains (Rhodes 2010) compared to a control group of students. In our assessment instrument, we asked students to demonstrate their achievement in integrative learning by writing statements in response to prompts about a New York Times article. The article was specifically selected because it is complex and interdisciplinary in focus. It explained the costs and benefits of the popularity of quinoa, which, although endemic to the Andes, has become popular in the U.S. due to its nutritional profile, forcing change onto the culture and economy of Bolivia. In addition, this specific topic was not discussed in any of our courses.

Using a corresponding evaluation rubric, we tested the students’ evaluation of the quinoa article to determine if exposure to a focused, integrative learning environment could result in superior critical thinking skills and abilities to understand food systems, integrate learning across disciplines, and make informed decisions about food choices, markers of three of our student learning outcomes: civic engagement, informed consumer, and food systems. The instrument and rubric were based on the Critical Thinking Value Rubric created by the AAC&U (Rhodes 2010) and on studies in which critical thinking is assessed by asking students to respond to a specific article or reading. Two studies that informed our protocol prompted students to read a designated article or reading and then to evaluate an issue in written form based upon the article or reading; these responses were then evaluated using a rubric designed to assess critical thinking skills (Miller 2004; Connors 2008).

The quinoa evaluation assessment instrument was completed by 161 students in nine Food for Thought Cluster classes and by 177 students in nine control classes. Our results showed that Food for Thought students scored significantly higher on the evaluation rubric compared to controls (∆ = 14.0%; p = 0.0008). Rubric scores also significantly correlated with the number of cluster courses taken (Spearman r = 0.32; p = 0.04), demonstrating the increased gain of interdisciplinary, integrative learning skills with each multidisciplinary cross-course project experience. Importantly, rubric scores did not correlate with increasing year in college, indicating that our students’ learning gains were related to the learning experiences specific to the cluster and not to academic maturity (Wingert et al. 2014).

Our earlier research also showed that students perceived gains in their communication skills (Wingert et al. 2011). Our most recent assessment efforts have sought to objectively determine whether these gains are demonstrable. Student communication skills will be evaluated from cross-course project student products, such as group poster presentations and two to three minute “selfie” videos of students describing their class research. Rubrics have been designed, based on the Critical Thinking Value Rubric created by the AAC&U (Rhodes 2010), to quantitatively assess communication abilities.

Faculty Reflections on Multidisciplinary Teaching and Integrative, Interdisciplinary Learning

By making a conscious decision not to “go it alone,” we (the faculty involved in this type of collaborative teaching and scholarship) have benefited in multiple ways. We have not only implemented opportunities to provide students with meaningful interdisciplinary learning (described above), but we have also added to our teaching tools, learned about each other’s disciplines, delved into new areas of research, forged friendships, and have had a remarkable amount of fun along the way.

Student Learning Gains

The first reason we have chosen to not “go it alone” is that we are convinced that it makes a difference for our students. We have previously highlighted the evidence we collected that demonstrates that students have both real and perceived gains in their learning. We suggest that they benefit from seeing an integrated model of teaching and learning in front of them—we undo before their eyes illusions they (or we) may have about solutions being simple or solvable from a single perspective. Instead, they are offered the opportunity to understand disciplines’ capacities to illuminate facets of a complex problem and to witness that collaboration across disciplines offers more synthetic solutions.

Teaching Gains

We also recognize a number of benefits we receive from abandoning the strategy of going it alone, and these are worth highlighting for those who might otherwise believe it is too big an effort for faculty to undertake. One particular benefit is the enhanced perspective we have on our own teaching. Pursuing the interdisciplinary learning in this collaborative manner ensures that our understanding of our effectiveness as teachers begins with us, and it has the benefit of arising organically from a collaboration of faculty who are actually doing the teaching. We have the opportunity to critically examine our strengths and weaknesses in the classroom and quickly act to build on our successes and ameliorate any deficiencies. As an example, one colleague learned from our assessment of cross-course projects that he is successful in guiding students through the steps necessary to write a good research paper, but not as successful in having them translate that research into posters and oral presentations. It is also rare for faculty to truly understand the student experience as they work through our curriculum because we generally only see them in courses in our home department. Our collaboration gives us a more nuanced understanding of the student academic experience and allows us to develop a more frank assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of students and faculty in our individual departments with respect to faculty and students in other departments.

Faculty Learning Gains

Another significant outcome of our collaborative teaching and research experience has been the opportunity to learn more from other team members about each other’s disciplines, including disciplinary perspectives and pedagogical methods. We are all now more literate in each other’s fields; this is, in and of itself, an outcome that is probably worth the time and energy we have put into this joint endeavor.

Faculty Scholarship Gains

We have also gained from the unique opportunity to participate in the intersection of the scholarship of teaching and learning with scholarship in our disciplines. It is more likely, however, that disciplinary scholarship and the scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL) will coincide for the social scientists than for our colleagues in the natural sciences and humanities. That is true simply because the scholarship that social scientists pursue in their discipline bears more similarity to our scholarship of teaching than that pursued by natural scientists and faculty in the humanities. We are all teachers, so one can argue that none of us should feel conflicted as we consider undertaking pedagogical research, but it may be that someone whose research training is in the natural sciences or the humanities would need to work harder to absorb and integrate the pertinent literature, and would need more assistance in study design, analysis, and interpretation of results than would a social scientist who regularly uses these methods in their disciplinary research. Moreover, although the scholarship of teaching and learning is a project shared by scholars from all disciplines, both explicit and implicit norms about how to conduct SoTL research come primarily from the social sciences. As a team, we have become stronger in our understanding of strategies for navigating those norms. From these opportunities to learn from each other, we have all benefited both individually and collectively from the sharing of our disciplinary research expertise. It has also been a real pleasure to implement curricular ideas and write collaboratively on a topic of shared interest— innovative ways to promote student learning—and to model integrated learning for our students.

Conclusions

In the face of many competing pressures on our time and the fact that our general education curriculum is in a state of flux, we as professors must continuously reaffirm our commitment to our work together and seek recognition and support from our university to continue these efforts. We have developed both a meaningful multidisciplinary collaboration and, indeed, friendships over these years and do not wish to see this partnership dissolve. Although we risk overworking ourselves if we do not locate efficiencies in our work, we also fear that our productivity and success as teachers and researchers will decline unless we find a way to adapt to the changing needs of society, the changing learning styles of students, and a changing curriculum.

Even at a small school, it is rare to build a collaboration across departments and divisions that allows faculty to develop trust and empathy across the university. Because we have worked closely together we have come to understand each other’s unique teaching and research environments and to break down barriers to communication across disciplines. Information gleaned from the experiences of these faculty members allows us to more effectively advocate for a work environment that is more humane and equitable.

We are engaged faculty—engaged in meaningful lines of inquiry with students both in our class and our colleagues’ classes, engaged with the discipline of our own training as well as the disciplines of our colleagues, and directly engaged with each other. Perhaps equally important, however, is the shared recognition of our own disciplinary and individual limitations that comes from this engagement. The economist among us will never teach a chemistry or nutrition class, just as the biologist among us will not teach a sociology class. Knowledge of chemistry, economics, or Spanish alone will not be sufficient to solve the world’s problems. While we (and our students) are now more able to speak each other’s language and recognize our own discipline’s strengths in contributing to solutions, we also recognize that the strongest teams, those teams needed to solve the world’s most complex problems, are composed of individuals with exceptional disciplinary strength.

In a recent essay regarding AAC&U initiatives for integrative learning, Ann Ferren and her co-authors argue that

Developing faculty’s capacity for leadership in integrative learning, then, is not just about working with other faculty for institutional change, but also demonstrating for students what this form of leadership looks like: adaptive, collaborative, inquisitive, reflective, and boundary-crossing.

The process of implementing integrative learning on a campus becomes a teaching tool, a means of modeling for students how to engage thoughtfully and actively in their communities toward a common purpose (Ferren et al. 2014/2015, 6).

Our experience on our campus reflects this spirit, and we concur with their conclusion that providing a model of a dynamic, functional, multidisciplinary team demonstrates to our students that no one person faces the burden of solving the problems associated with food insecurity or climate change. Indeed, choosing not to “go it alone” models engaged citizenship for our students, other faculty, and ourselves. Assessments of our multidisciplinary model provide evidence for student gains in perceptions of integrative learning and accomplishment of our goal to develop more informed citizens with multifaceted perspectives on complex civic issues. The context we provide for our students through our cross-course projects and meaningful cross-disciplinary action is exactly what is needed for promoting citizen science.

About the Authors

Sally Wasileski is an Associate Professor in the Department of Chemistry at the University of North Carolina Asheville. She earned her Ph.D. from Purdue University and completed a post-doc at the University of Virginia, specializing in analytical chemistry and using computational methods to investigate reactions occurring at metal surfaces. Her research focus with under- graduate student researchers is on understanding the catalytic reactions that generate hydrogen fuels from biomass; in addition, she mentors student research on quantifying environmental contaminants. Sally teaches General Chemistry, Analytical Chemistry, Instrumental Analysis, Physical Chemistry, and a course for non-science majors called The Food of Chemistry, which is designed to teach chemistry principles through the topics of food and cooking.

Karin Peterson is Professor of Sociology and Chair of the Department of Sociology and Anthropology at the University of North Carolina Asheville. She earned a diplôme d’études approfondies (DEA) from the Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales in Sociology of Art, and holds a Ph.D. in Sociology from the University of Virginia. She teaches theory, gender, and sociology of culture.

Leah Greden Mathews is Interdisciplinary Distinguished Professor of the Mountain South and Professor of Economics at the University of North Carolina Asheville. As an applied economist, she studies the intangibles in our society including those things that are not readily exchanged in markets, like scenic quality, cultural heritage, and social capital. As an interdisciplinary, systems-thinking teacher-scholar, she is perennially engaged with students and colleagues from multiple disciplines in order to enrich her intellectual life, improve her (and others’) understanding of the world, and gain new perspectives.

Amy Joy Lanou is Associate Professor and Chair of the Department of Health and Wellness at University of North Carolina Asheville. She received her doctoral degree in Human Nutrition from Cornell University and brings work experience in nutrition promotion and policy advocacy at the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine in Washington, DC to her work at UNC Asheville. She teaches Nutrition, Health Communication, and Food Politics and Nutrition Policy and focuses on dietary prevention of chronic disease and the use of experiential food education to influence dietary choices.

David Clarke is a botanist and Professor in the Biology Department at the University of North Carolina Asheville. He earned his Ph.D. from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and was a postdoctoral fellow at the Smithsonian Institution. He works with colleagues in UNCA’s Biology Department on the conservation biology of threatened plants such as American ginseng and Virginia spiraea, as well as the ecological threats posed by non-native invasive species. He also works in the rainforests and savannas of Guyana, South America to document its rich plant diversity and has had a new species of passionflower from Guyana (Dilkea clarkei) named in his honor.

Ellen Bailey is a Lecturer in the Department of Foreign Languages at the University of North Carolina Asheville and occasionally teaches in the Department of Health and Wellness as well. She earned her M.A. in French/Foreign Language Pedagogy from the University of Delaware and her Master of Public Health from the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill. Ellen enjoys working with students and community members to better understand how culture and environment influence health behavior.

Jason Wingert is an Associate Professor in the Department of Health and Wellness at the University of North Carolina Asheville. He earned his Master of Physical Therapy from the University of Missouri Columbia, and his Ph.D. from Washington University in St. Louis. He teaches Anatomy, Physiology, and Pathophysiology. In addition to teaching, he enjoys advising students and mentoring them in his laboratory, where he studies sensorimotor function in older adults and people with diabetic peripheral neuropathy.

References

Connors, P. 2008. “Assessing Written Evidence of Critical Thinking Using an Analytic Rubric.” Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior 40: 193–94.

Ferren, A., C. Anderson, and K. Hovland. 2014/2015. “Interrogating Integrative Learning.” Peer Review 16/17 (4/1): 4–6.

Huber, M.T., P. Hutchings, R. Gale, R. Miller, and M. Breen. 2007. “Leading Initiatives for Liberal Learning.” Liberal Education 93 (2): 46–51.

Miller, D.R. 2004. “An Assessment of Critical Thinking: Can Pharmacy Students Evaluate Clinical Studies Like Experts?” American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education 68: 1–6.

Rhodes, T.L., ed. 2010. Assessing Outcomes and Improving Assess- ment: Tips and Tools for Using Rubrics. Washington, DC: Association of American Colleges and Universities.

Schneider, C.G. 2004. “Changing Practices in Liberal Education: What Future Faculty Need to Know.” Peer Review 6 (3): 4–7.

SENCER (Science Education for New Civic Engagements and Responsibilities). 2015. The SENCER Ideals. http://www. sencer.net/About/sencerideals.cfm (accessed January 18, 2016).

Wingert J.R., S.A. Wasileski, K. Peterson, L.G. Mathews, A.J. Lanou, and D. Clarke. 2011. “Enhancing Integrative Experiences: Evidence of Student Perceptions of Learning Gains from Cross- course Interactions.” Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning 11 (3): 34–57.

Wingert J.R., S.A. Wasileski, K. Peterson, L.G. Mathews, A.J. Lanou, and D. Clarke. 2014. “The Impact of Integrated Student Experiences on Learning.” Journal of the Scholarship of Teach- ing and Learning 14 (1): 45–58.

Download (PDF, 740KB)

Abstract

The applied research pilot project of this report seeks to advance K-8 STEM learning by bridging in-school, scholastic learning sessions with informal, out-of-school, summertime learning at public libraries. Professional library programming for children and families around reading and learning is already an integral component of meeting community needs, especially during the summer months when skills can be lost. Annually, and nationally, public libraries have been sharing a themed set of guidelines and activities for Summer Reading Clubs, and activities for K-8 Summer Reading Clubs. The pilot program has been designed to professionally train librarians, administrators, and volunteers for orienting these children, their parents and guardians, to STEM learning in particular, based on scholastic Common Core State Standards (CCSS) in mathematics/English language arts, and Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS). This report describes the activities and progress in the first year of the two-year pilot, including results from an external evaluation.

Introduction

Public Library of the Conflicted Civic Mind

If a community is fortunate enough to have its own public library, that library is often openly associated with civic pride, and, at least within the core body of the library’s users and supporters, with a genuine love of books and reading. For some modern-day cynics, nevertheless, the public library is perceived as only a side street of the new main road paved for the Internet. This paper will demonstrate that such a perception is false; we will show how libraries can reinvent themselves to an even larger educational purpose, one that is integral to scholastic STEM learning, and one that can better withstand cynical views.

The Murrysville Community Library is a non-profit corporation, with a Board of Directors, with its own Articles of Incorporation, with an annual budget plan, and with a strategic plan; it is no different from any other corporation, but because it serves at the pleasure of the community, the conflicting views between user and non-user, book-lover and cynic, impact annual funding and viability. In the state of Pennsylvania, where we serve in the southwest corner, there are 445 such public libraries and twenty-nine Districts into which the libraries are grouped regionally (PDE 2012). Districts sometimes correspond with counties.

On Building a New Model

In our District of twenty-four libraries, the Westmoreland Library Network (WLNTM), we are in the midst of piloting a new model, one that is intended to eventually overcome not only cynical perceptions, but complacency as well, and to fill a societal educational void (Greenberg and Falo 2014–15). This is really the goal of the pilot project. It integrates a summertime, K-8 educational library experience—based on Common Core State Standards in mathematics/English language arts and Next Generation Science Standards—with formal, standards-based, scholastic learning (NGSS 2014; PA Common Core 2012; Widener 2014). The two-year pilot is about bridging fall/winter/spring scholastic semesters with enhanced and more purposeful, standards-based summer programming. This paper is a report on the first year’s activities and progress, including an external evaluation by the Collaborative for Evaluation and Assessment Capacity (CEAC), University of Pittsburgh School of Education.

Background

Library Strengths and Addressing a Weakness

In Pennsylvania, public libraries are well-established, stable resources for information access, reading for pleasure, and informal learning. They operate with a common core of information services. Library Directors and some other staff are trained at the level of a university M.S. Public libraries adhere to specific state library codes, and they operate under the state’s Pennsylvania Department of Education, the Office of Commonwealth Libraries. However, while skilled in reading literacy, staff is rarely trained in STEM subject matter or pedagogy. The two-year pilot project in progress seeks to advance student interest in or disposition towards STEM, along with actual learning and understanding of STEM concepts, by building library staff capacity to include STEM in its programming and to make more connections with CCSS and NGSS standards. It seeks to reach across a full spectrum of learning groups in one large PA county/ District, with rural to suburban to urban population, and also to be comprehensive with respect to gender, race, ethnicity, and economic means.

Summer Reading Club as Central to the Vision

Many public libraries in all fifty states already participate in an organized Summer Reading Club activity, using a nationally themed set of guidelines and activities structured by the Collaborative Summer Library Program (CSLP 2014). For 2014, the designated theme was “Science: Fizz, Boom, Read!,” a first-time explicit focus on science in twenty years of theme-setting. The pilot is designed to take advantage of the established and ongoing reading program and its popularity, as well as the favorable theme. It is doing this by training library staff and key programming volunteers in advance of summer to orient children, parents, and guardians to CCSS/ NGSS learning, under the banner of the Summer Reading Club. The collaborating trainers, who otherwise train scholastic teachers and administrators in their usual role, are Mathematics & Science Coordinators from southwestern PA’s Math & Science Collaborative (MSC), of which more will be said below. Those who are trained then become trainers for all participants, hopefully leading to the lifelong standards-based learning for all that is needed throughout our society.

MSC Trainers and Library Trainees

For eleven counties, 138 public school districts and non-public schools, MSC stands as the area’s comprehensive catalyst for advancement of K-12 STEM learning. MSC’s multifaceted STEM program, by which 1250+ teachers and administrators have received training over about twenty years, has: (1) sustained a teacher culture of lifelong professional learning by the internal sharing of best practices and external enrichment; (2) taught teachers to take more personal responsibility for lifetime professional learning; (3) institutionalized a complex array of professional communication and training networks for teachers, administrators, and institutions of education; (4) established the MSC as a leading proponent for CCSS and NGSS standards. In 2012, the MSC earned the prestigious Carnegie Science Center’s Leadership in STEM Education Award in recognition of its exceptional impact. It is well positioned to repurpose its usual teacher-training model for use in the public library world.

Key trainees include Library Directors, Children’s Librarians, volunteers, and Board Directors. The Directors are important for building administrative support for the initiative; in 2014 four Directors from the Murrysville Community Library (MCL) Board and/or its fundraising MCL Foundation Board participated. The two Boards work closely, even sharing a Strategic Plan; two trainees serve on both Boards. For this first year, Murrysville Community Library was targeted as the particular focus for training, rather than the WLN District as a whole, although participants came from ten libraries in all. In 2015 the emphasis will shift to the WLN District as a whole. MCL’s Library Director and Youth Services Coordinator participated fully.

MCL is a particularly good starting point for the pilot because of its depth of experience and recognized skill in children’s programming. The MCL offers numerous special programs for patrons of all ages, both on-site and off, some seasonally. The Children’s Library was recognized as the 2009 statewide winner of the prestigous PA Library Association’s David J. Roberts EXCEL Library Service Award. Furthermore, the MCL consistently draws about 900 youngsters annually for its Summer Reading Club, which is significant in a service area of about 28,000 people.

Specific Goals and Hypotheses

The project’s specific goals are (1) to incorporate STEM learning in nationally themed K-8 Summer Reading Club programming in public libraries, as well as other children’s programming during the year, as informed by curriculum grade-level standards; (2) to bridge grade-level learning during the otherwise low-STEM content, out-of-school summer months; (3) to make volunteers and family members a part of the learning, so that children and their families realize enrichment in both the library and home settings. The year-one parental experience is limited to on-site observation and/or child engagement at home; more direct training may be possible when staff members are better prepared as trainers themselves.

The research and development hypotheses are that: (1) in-school student STEM learning can be advanced, given continuity, and sustained by repurposing in-school MSC practices to out-of-school children’s programming in public libraries; (2) all children can learn science and mathematics; (3) awareness and knowledge of 21st-century skills for life- long, “life-wide,” and “life-deep” STEM experiences can be fostered in public library settings for family groups.

Methods

Workshops

Eight half-day training workshops were conducted from January through April 2014. Each was led by a pair of staff members from the MSC, most often paired as two Science Coordinators or two Math Coordinators. The workshops included explanative discussion by the Coordinators, hands-on activities, and extensive interactive discussion. The hands-on activities were connected to children’s literature that served as the pathway to important mathematics and/ or science processes and content.

For example, one session focused on number and shape patterns. The MSC facilitator read aloud the story “The Grapes of Math” (Tang 2004). Trainees then worked in small groups to solve a particular riddle from the story. Each trainee group shared its riddle and solution strategy with the other trainee groups. The ensuing plenary discussion focused on the following essential questions:

• What mathematical or scientific concepts/ideas did the riddles (or activity) illuminate?
• What insights/ideas did the activity leave with you?
• With which standards of mathematical practice (or science and engineering practices) and English language arts capacities did the riddles most require you to engage? Why?
• What are the implications for planning your summer reading program? How might you use a task/story/ac- tivity like this in the summer reading program?

Additional examples of the mathematics and science content of the exercises are summarized in Table 1.

The number of workshop attendees ranged from ten to twenty-two, averaging eighteen. In total, there were thirty-four unique attendees for the purposes of the external evaluation to be discussed below, of which thirty-one were library trainees. The additional three were community leaders with a stake in the outcome (Mayor, Superintendent of Schools, and Assistant Superintendent); these three attended part of one workshop each. The Program Officer and a Board Director from the lead funding agency participated at part of one workshop. The number of workshops attended by library trainees ranged from one to eight, but each workshop was sufficiently illustrative of CCSS/NGSS learning that a trainee could get the main points in one session. In general, additional sessions served to reinforce learning with new math and/or science process/content connections to children’s literature, to be applied during the coming Summer Reading Club.

A Venn diagram from Michaels (2013, 59), showing the CCSS/NGSS standards for mathematical practice, science and engineering practices, and English language arts capacities, was used repeatedly as a thumbnail point of reference. The trainers discussed the fuller descriptions for each set of practices as well. They provided all trainees with more extensive written content in three-ring binders, to which ongoing reference was made. These standards describe the proficiencies being targeted for the trainees, mirroring those exhibited by a mathematically and scientifically literate individual. At every workshop, the appropriate standards were discussed in the context of exemplary, hands-on exercises, each of which was done typically in groups of three or four. The intent was always to help the trainees understand the processes and proficiencies of mathematics and science, including how to reason in a professional way, and how to communicate in an informed way. Thus, the training was about more than just mathematical and scientific content, although that too was embedded in the exercises.

External Evaluation

The MCL contracted with the University of Pittsburgh’s Collaborative for Evaluation and Assessment Capacity to evaluate the 2014-2015 program. Two surveys were constructed to examine the effect of the program on the students and the library staff, administrators, and volunteers who participated in the training, particularly with regard to how their familiarity and understanding of mathematics and science concepts progressed. Training participants were contacted via email to complete the participant survey, while parents of children who participated in the program were asked, via email, to provide the survey to their children and to assist them in its completion. Survey responses addressed the following evaluation questions:

Q1: Do participating library staff, volunteers, and/or third parties develop or extend their knowledge and understanding of STEM content and learning engagement strategies?

Q2: Do participating library staff, volunteers, and/or third parties develop or extend their application of STEM content and learning engagement strategies?

Q3: Do child and adolescent learners engage with STEM concepts and processes in their involvement in the Summer Reading Club and/or their use of the library during summer months?

Q4: Do child and adolescent learners exhibit more positive perceptions of and attitudes toward STEM concepts and processes as a result of their involvement in the Summer Reading Club and/or their use of the library during summer months?

Input data were analyzed using basic descriptive statistics for scaled responses. Qualitative analysis strategies were used for open-ended responses. Sample survey questions are shown in Table 2.

Results

Of the 34 workshop participants who were surveyed by the CEAC, 68% (n=23) responded, all of them library staff/administrator/volunteer trainees (Winters and Wade 2014). As for parents and children who participated in the program, about 6% (n=61) of the total of participants responded to the survey. The key findings from the report are as follows:

Key Findings for the Training Participants

• Roughly half of the training participants (57%, n=12) had never received any prior professional development in mathematics and/or science.
• More than two-thirds of respondents (71%, n=15) strongly agreed or agreed that they are better able to answer students’ questions about various STEM concepts and assist families in helping their children to learn and understand math and science.
• A large majority (81%, n=17) indicated greater confidence in their ability to select more appropriate resources to improve children’s knowledge of mathematics and science.
• A large majority of respondents (86%, n=18) indicated that as a result of the training they better understood how children think about mathematics and science.
• Nearly all respondents (90.5%, n=19) indicated that as a result of the training program they could better help children appreciate the value of learning math and science.
• Nearly all open-ended responses indicated that respondents could better help students to appreciate the value in learning mathematics and science as a result of training participation.

Key Findings for the Students

• Gender and grade level seemed to be non-factors for student enjoyment of Summer Reading Club; however, girl respondents indicated a greater interest in science than boy respondents as a result of participating in the Science: Fizz, Boom, Read! program (girls: 80%, n=24; boys: 61%, n=19).
• More than three-quarters of student respondents (77%, n=47) had previously participated in library programs.
• Over half of the students (54%, n=32) indicated that, as a result of participating in Science: Fizz, Boom, Read! they understood science better.
• Almost three-quarters of student respondents (73%, n=43) indicated an increased interest in science as a result of the Science: Fizz, Boom, Read! program.
• Over half of student respondents (51%, n=30) indicated that they would use the library to learn more about science. Of these 30 students, 53% (n=16) indicated that they were more inclined to ask librarians questions about science.
• A large majority of student respondents (81%, n=48) stated that they wanted to attend more programs about science and were more interested in science experiments as a result of the Science: Fizz, Boom, Read! program.

Discussion and Summary

Although the above results represent only the earliest product of what is perceived to be a multiyear and ongoing growth process, they are entirely positive and encouraging. Both trainees and students affirmed the multiple benefits to their relationships with STEM from the experience. The responses are consistent with the earlier brief report of Greenberg and Falo (2014–15), made before CEAC’s external evaluation was done. Certain early outcomes are noted in that report. The most important are these: (1) children’s librarians from multiple libraries began immediately to plan together for the year’s Summer Reading Club, which they had not done before; (2) librarians expressed appreciation for having had identified for them STEM children’s books of high value and credibility; (3) as a given, for the first time, there is now an ongoing working collaboration among scholastic trainers and librarians (as evidenced now by the co-authorship of the present report).

In the second-year Summer Reading Club 2015 timeframe, the K-8 theme is known to be Every Hero Has a Story. This theme is not explicitly science-based, as was the year-one theme, but it does still serve as a framework for introducing STEM content. Indeed, every theme can be made to include STEM content. In this case, some of the heroes will actually be scientists, mathematicians, or engineers. Some will be non-scientists who use STEM. For example, a fireman hero learns to extinguish fires using chemical combustion principles. Similar strategies can be applied generally for topics yet unnamed in subsequent years. In that way, as librarians gain knowledge and skills, they will continue to create programs and provide informed resources that encourage patron interaction with STEM concepts, even while continuing to promote reading skills and language arts.

In 2014, a first step was taken to introduce the pilot and its intent to the Superintendent of Schools and the Assistant Superintendent for Murrysville. This was done through their participation as trainees and by off-site exchanges. Each participating library will need to make this an ongoing effort. Finally, returning to the question of whether the public library has become just a side street to the main Internet thoroughfare: it has not, or at least it should not have done so, for one main reason. The Internet is a place to find everything, both information that is informed, correct, and professionally referenced, and information that is not. This goes to the matter of quality of information, and consistency with respect to quality, and, in the case of STEM subjects, adherence to the scientific approach itself. Thus, the Internet has an inherent weakness. Anyone can add information to it, and do so without rules as to quality, and no one is responsible for showing the reader or user how to differentiate. With proper training, the same is not true of public libraries; a well-trained and present staff can make the difference, for using both the local collection and the Internet. The first year of this project has shown that staff consciousness has been raised in respect to choosing quality STEM resources for collection-building and programming, including Summer Reading Club programming. This outcome alone convinces us that we are on the right track with this project.

Our goal for the second year of sponsored training is to expand participation within our District to a broader population of staff members, administrators, and volunteers, including both new and repeat participants. We have also arranged to have at least one participant from a contiguous District attend a training session, with the purpose of possibly expanding the program to her District. Ultimately, depending on outcomes, we imagine at least a statewide presence for STEM training, with goals similar to those of this pilot.

About the Authors

Charles B. Greenberg is retired Corporate Fellow and Manager of Flat Glass New Product Development for PPG Industries, Inc., with expertise in glass, solar control, thin films, switchable materials, and photocatalysis for self-cleaning. He earned a B.S. from Rutgers University and a Ph.D. and M.S. from the University of Illinois, all in Materials Science/Engineering. Since retirement in 2002, he has been dedicated to several special K-12 to senior learning initiatives relating to STEM and has served on various education and library Boards/Councils. For purposes of the present article, he is a Director and Im- mediate Past President of the Murrysville Community Library Board, as well as the Westmoreland Library Network’s Treasurer, Immediate Past President, and representative on the Math & Science Collaborative Steering Council.

Nancy R. Bunt is Program Director of southwestern Pennsylvania’s Math & Science Collaborative, headquartered at the Allegheny Intermediate Unit. She also served concurrently as MSC’s Principal Investigator for a $20 million Southwest Pennsylvania Math Science Partnership funded by the NSF and the PA Dept. of Education. She has led the Collaborative in the coordination of efforts to focus K-16 and informal learning resources on strengthening the teaching and learning of mathematics and science for all 138 K-12 school districts in the 11 counties surrounding and including Pittsburgh. Bunt is a certified teacher and administrator who has worked in urban and suburban settings in Pennsylvania and in Europe. She earned her undergraduate degree from the University of Michigan, and her masters and doctorate from the University of Pittsburgh.

Jamie K. Falo has been Library Director for the Murrysville Community Library in Murrysville, PA since 2011, following nine years as Library Director for the Mount Pleasant Public Library in Mount Pleasant. She earned her B.S. and M.L.I.S. from the University of Pittsburgh. Jamie is an active member of the Pennsylvania Library Association (PaLA), serves in various positions of governance for the Westmoreland Library Network, and serves on the Franklin Regional School District Act 48 Committee. Jamie presented a poster about aspects of this paper at the 2014 PaLA Southwest Regional Summer Reading Club Conference.

Michael Fierle is certified in Secondary Mathematics Education, Supervisory-Mathematics, and K-12 Principal. He completed his undergraduate studies at Indiana University of PA, and then attended the University of Pittsburgh where he earned his M.Ed. by completing the Administrative and Policies Studies program. His teaching experience includes eight years as a middle/ high school mathematics educator in various school systems in PA and VA. As a Mathematics Coordinator with the Math & Science Collaborative for the past ten years, he has provided direct math professional development to school districts and educators throughout southwestern PA, as well as support for regional STEM Professional Learning Communities (PLCs).

Barbara Lease has been in education for 24 years and is currently a Science Coordinator with the Math & Science Collaborative. Barbara earned a B.S. in biology from Allegheny College, did graduate work at the University of Pittsburgh in human genetics, and was certified as a biology teacher through Seton Hill University. Previously, Barbara worked as biology and mathematics instructor for Mater Dei College in Ogdensburg, New York, as a professional development coordinator at the Carnegie Science Center, Pittsburgh, and as a secondary science teacher in the Pittsburgh area’s Penn Hills School District.

Corinne Murawski is a Mathematics Coordinator with the Math & Science Collaborative and a mother of two daughters, ages 4 and 9. Corinne earned her undergraduate degree from Penn State University, and her Masters degree in Education Policy Studies and a K-12 Supervisory Certificate from Duquesne University. Previously, Corinne worked as a district-level administrator for supervision of mathematics/computer science; as a curriculum, textbook, and cognitive tutor developer; and as a classroom teacher in mathematics and science. Corinne has worked with the University of Pittsburgh to supervise pre-service mathematics teachers, and she has also taught undergraduate and graduate courses both face-to-face and online.

Gabriela Rose is a Science Coordinator for the Math & Science Collaborative at the Allegheny Intermediate Unit in Pittsburgh, PA. In this position she is working with science teachers and administrators to implement rigorous inquiry-based science instruction with the goal of preparing all students for college and career in the 21st century. Before coming to the Allegheny Intermediate Unit, Gabriela taught middle school science. Gabriela holds certification for Biology 7–12, Middle Level Science, K-12 Principal, and Supervisor for Curriculum and Instruction. Gabriela earned her undergraduate and graduate degrees in biology and physical education at the Free University of Berlin, and a Master of Science in Ecology from the University of California at Davis.

Cynthia A. Tananis founded the Collaborative for Evaluation and Assessment Capacity in the School of Education at the University of Pittsburgh and serves as its Director and as an Associate Professor in the School Leadership Program. Her expertise focuses on using participative evaluation designs with involved stakeholders, helping people make sense of and benefit from the evaluation process through collaboration, and linking evaluation studies and school reform policy. She holds a B.S. in Education and an Ed.D. in Policy, Planning, and Evaluation Studies, both from the University of Pittsburgh.

Keith Trahan serves as the Assistant Director of CEAC. Keith has been lead evaluator for a variety of programs in the areas of K-12 math and science reform and school leadership, IHE STEM curriculum, instruction, and learning, IHE international education, and community-based human services. He holds a B.A. in Government and a B.A. in Sociology from McNeese State University, an M.A.T. from Charleston Southern University, and a Ph.D. from the Social and Comparative Analysis in Education Program at the University of Pittsburgh.

Dana Winters serves as Senior Evaluator for CEAC. Dana has experience leading evaluations throughout PK-16 formal education, large-scale STEM and literacy reform initiatives, informal education, and community-based non-profit evaluation. Dana has a B.A. in Sociology and Political Science from Saint Vincent College and a M.A. in Student Affairs in Higher Education from Indiana University of Pennsylvania. She is currently a doctoral student in the Social and Comparative Analysis in Education Program at the University of Pittsburgh.

References

CSLP®, Collaborative Summer Reading Club. 2014. “Fizz Boom ReadTM,” http://www.cslpreads.org (accessed October 17, 2014).

Greenberg, C.B., and J. Falo. 2014–15. “CCSS/NGSS Pilot for Summer Reading Club 2014–2015.” Math & Science Collaborative Journal 20: 28–29. http://www.aiu3.net/uploadedFiles/Teaching_and_Learning/ Math_and_Science_Collaborative/2014-2015%20Journal%20(com- plete).pdf (accessed January 14, 2015).

Michaels, Sarah. 2013. “What’s Common Across the Common Core (ELAS and Math) and the Next Generation Science Standards?” Presentation of NSTA WEB Seminars: Live Interactive Learning @ Your Desktop. http://learningcenter.nsta.org/products/sympo- sia_seminars/NGSS/files/ConnectionsBetweenPracticesinNGSS- CommonCoreMathandCommonCoreELA_2-12-2013.pdf (accessed January 14, 2015).

NGSS, Next Generation Science Standards. 2014. http://www. nextgenscience.org/next-generation-science-standards (accessed January 14, 2015).

PA Common Core. 2012. http://www.pa-commoncorestandards.com (accessed January 14, 2015).

Pennsylvania Department of Education. 2012. Office of Commonwealth Libraries. “Library Statistics.” http://www.portal.state.pa.us/portal/ server.pt/community/library_statistics/8696 (accessed January 14, 2015).

Tang, G. 2004. The Grapes of Math. New York: Scholastic Paperbacks. Widener, A. 2014. “A New Standard.” Chemical & Engineering News 92(35): 43–45.

Winters, D.M., and K.T. Wade. 2014. “Librarian/volunteer and Student Surveys for Murrysville Community Library’s CCSS/NGSS Pilot for Summer Reading Club.” Collaboration for Evaluation and Assessment Capacity (CEAC). September Report, School of Education, University of Pittsburgh.

Notes

• The authors thank the Community Foundation of Westmoreland County (affiliated with The Pittsburgh Foundation) for its lead support in the project. They also are grateful to the following key supporters: the Community Foundation of Murrysville, Export, and Delmont; PPG GIVE Award; the Lulu Pool Trust, managed by First Commonwealth Bank; Lakshmi Gupta.
• Cole, A. Ruiz, and B. Degen. 1998. The Magic School Bus Plays Ball: A Book About Forces. New York: Scholastic Paperbacks.
• EIE, Engineering is Elementary. 2014. “The Engineering Design Process.” http://www.eie.org/overview/engineering-design-process (accessed January 14, 2015).

FOSS, Full Option Science System. “Investigation 1: Balance.” http:// www.lyvemedia.com/delta/grade/2/balance_and_motion/investi- gation_1/balancemotion_inv1_background.html (accessed January 14, 2015).

Home Experiments on scifun.org. 2012. “Dancing Raisins.” http:// scifun.chem.wisc.edu/homeexpts/HOMEEXPTS.HTML (accessed January 14, 2015).

ICE, Institute for Chemical Education. 2012. “Is Black Really Black?” and“The Mystery Pen.” http://ice.chem.wisc.edu/SSC/SSC_ Color.pdf (accessed January 14, 2015).

Keeley, P., and J. Tugel. 2009. Uncovering Student Ideas in Science, Volume 4: 25 New Formative Assessment Probes for Grades K-2. Chapter 15. Arlington, VA: NSTA Press.

Keeley, P. 2013. Uncovering Student Ideas in Primary Science, Volume 1: 25 New Formative Assessment Probes for Grades K-2. Chapter 14. Arlington, VA: NSTA Press.

MARS, Mathematics Assessment Resource Service. 2003. “Buttons.” http://www.cfn609.org/uploads/4/6/9/6/4696562/task_-_ buttons_mars2003-05.pdf (accessed January 14, 2015).

Math Solutions. 2009. “Literature-Math Connection—Moira’s Birthday.” http://mathsolutions.com/documents/Moiras_ Birthday_i34.pdf (accessed January 14, 2015).

Munsch, R. 1992. Moira’s Birthday. Toronto: Annick Press.

Project Wet International Foundation. 2009. Discover Floods Educators Guide: 9. “Incredible Journey.” http://www.apfm.info/edu- cation/kids/WET_Discover_Floods_Ed_Guide.pdf (accessed January 14, 2015).

Robertson, W. 2014. “Science 101: What Causes Friction?” Science & Children (May–June). 60–62.

Tang, G. 2004. The Grapes of Math. New York: Scholastic Paperbacks. The Inquiry Project: Seeing the World Through A Scientist’s Eyes. 2011. “What Causes the Water Level to Rise?” http://inquiryproject. terc.edu/curriculum/curriculum4/4_mineralmaterials/inv4_1 (accessed January 14, 2015).

Yang, L. 2007. “A Cool Glass of Water: A Mystery.” http://sciencecases. lib.buffalo.edu/cs/files/melting_ice.pdf (accessed January 14, 2015).

Download (PDF, 849KB)

It is commonly assumed that“distance learning,” or education that is asynchronous and non-residential, involves a substitution of the online version of traditional pedagogies—lectures, assignments, discussions, etc.—for live, in-class experiences, often at the cost of student engagement in the social and experiential aspects of learning. However, new technology can also allow faculty to design independent, unscripted, and embodied learning experiences that deepen students’ engagement with their own learning. The innovative course described below used simple and widely available technological tools to empower students to become self-directed learners while contributing to the body of public knowledge about an important environmental resource.

The Northern Forest Canoe course is a freshman general education (“core”) course developed by an interdisciplinary team of three faculty (Joseph Staples, chemical ecology; Robert Sanford, environmental planning; and Elizabeth Vella, psychology) at the University of Southern Maine (USM) to provide an experiential, non-residency learning experience. This course was designated an “entry year experience” (EYE) that reflects the principles of Science Education for New Civic Engagements and Responsibilities (SENCER). We wanted to create a course that would provide learners with basic competency in environmental science field skills (GPS, compass, dichotomous keys, transects, shoreline field assessment, tree and aquatic plant identification, use of canoes and field equipment for water quality sampling) through an immersion experience that connected students to a natural community and would foster a sense of stewardship.

We developed this as a “distance learning” course rather than as a true online course, because the learning occurs at a distance, through field work, and is the result of the student’s own activities and reflections—there are no online lectures or formal sessions. Instead, the course is an asynchronous learning experience that takes place at the convenience of the student during a designated portion of the summer. However, the possibility remains of offering future versions as a synchronous “expeditionary” course led by an instructor.

The location of the course (fig. 1) is the Northern Forest Canoe Trail, 740 miles (1,190 km) of marked canoeing trail extending from Old Forge, New York to Fort Kent, Maine. The specific sections of the trail to be investigated are selected by the individual student. There is no fixed distance a participant must travel, but the student must spend at least 10 days in which five or more hours per day are spent on the waters of the trail.

Target populations for the course include military veterans returning to school and desiring a gradual entry through a contemplative nature experience, other non-traditional learners, and freshmen who want to get a head start on their college educational experience before the academic year commences. The authors of this paper, as veterans themselves, particularly sought the opportunity to reach out to veterans. Psychology Professor Elizabeth Vella’s research focuses on the benefits of outdoor experiences for combat veterans, and a number of the reading assignments address the therapeutic aspects of outdoor recreation.

This course is designed to credentialize a self-guided outdoor learning experience mentored by university professors with interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary expertise. Participants undergo the equivalent of ten or more days (which need not be consecutive) of canoe or kayak trips along portions of the Northern Forest Canoe Trail. Since the goal is experiential, it is not important how much of the trail is covered, nor that the travel be completed all at once. Instead, participants set their own schedule, provide periodic online check-ins, and submit assignments designed to foster an experience that is contemplative and that builds independent learning skills. The course provides an introduction to environmental data gathering and assessment, to aspects of environmental management, and to critical thinking about personal, social, and ecological implications of the Northern Forest Canoe Trail. Students are assumed to have a knowledge of basic water safety, canoeing/kayaking ability, orienteering and map reading skills, and camping/ cooking or other logistical support skills. The course is a self-guided experience; students are expected to rely upon their own abilities and to undertake only those trips that are safe and attainable within their skill set and equipment capabilities. Students are free to take along partners, friends, and family members.

This course is suitable for anyone seeking to explore the environment or learn about environmental science. It is also suitable for anyone who wants a self-paced entry to a college-level experience. The course fulfills the Entry Year Experience core education requirement for USM. Accordingly the course meshes with the core EYE goals, as specified on the syllabus. This non-traditional approach constituted an act of faith between the developers and the summer program staff. The supervising program director stated: “I am pleased to have supported the innovative Northern Canoe Trail course as a pilot this summer, even with a small enrollment. If summer is not the time to incubate cool, experimental ideas that have the potential to reach students differently then I don’t know when is! I hope this course will continue to gain momentum while inspiring students and faculty alike.”¹  In furtherance of this goal, USM Online’s Center for Technology Enhanced Learning (CTEL) provided a $2,000 development grant for the course. USM Reference Librarian Zip Kellog, author of several canoeing publications, provided input into the course development, as did the Veteran Certifying Officer, Laurie Spaulding; Susan McWilliams, Associate Provost for Undergraduate Education; and other staff at the university.

This course and USM’s Entry Year Experience (EYE) goals:

1. Employ a variety of perspectives to explore the interrelationship between human culture and the natural world of the Northern Forest Canoe
2. Pose and explore questions in areas that are new and challenging: as a part of the river experience students will develop questions about the stewardship of this Students may draw from conservation biology and ecology, geology, environmental history, environmental literature, economics, other social and physical sciences, and the fine arts.
3. The online posting requirements of this course give students opportunity to immediately respond to their experiences and to receive feedback from a mentor (one or more instructors).
4. Reflect upon and link learning in the course with other learning experiences (for example co-curricular experience). This course is co-curricular by its very Students will provide formative assessments via their online postings/uplinks. The self-assessment piece at the end is a final summative.
5. Recognize that an individual’s viewpoint is shaped by his or her experiences and by historical and cultural The student will evaluate his/her views and perspectives on the NFCT.

Course objectives

10. Complete a total of 10 or more days of canoe/kayak experience on the waters of the These days need not be consecutive and can be selected at the convenience of the student within the timeframe of the course
11. Employ environmental science field skills (notably, GPS, compass, dichotomous keys, transects, shoreline assessment, tree and aquatic plant identification, use of canoes and field equipment for water quality and other environmental sampling) to gather data and document river
12. Participate in a Google+ virtual community of paddlers.
13. Record reactions to an immersive, contemplative experience in rural or even wilderness riparian settings with the intention of deepening one’s connection to a natural community and fostering a sense of stewardship.
14. Be able to describe the interdisciplinary nature of independent learning and self-assessment as part of a college-readiness experience.

The course uses a variety of assignments in a low stakes writing approach. Low stakes writing—“writing to learn”— is central to the achievement and assessment of learning outcomes. It is low stakes because there are no right or wrong answers and there are frequent assignments. Low stakes writing for this course includes a journal and separate responses to experience posted in the discussion section of Blackboard. The questions and writing prompts are drawn from Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives and are keyed to the assigned texts, conditions of the environment, and the experiential nature of the course as a self-guided river corridor transit.

The course establishes an online community in which students share their work and their reflections and in which stakeholders can participate. The civic engagement aspects of this course include a “client” partner, the Northern Forest Canoe Trail (NFCT) non-profit organization. NFCT provided input into the development of the course, including requests for specific projects to be accomplished by the participants. One member of the NFCT Board of Directors responded: “We are delighted that Professor Sanford and his colleagues at USM have developed this innovative course for experiential learning along the Northern Forest Canoe Trail. Students learn and earn credits toward a degree while enjoying a potentially life-changing experience, and their notes and observations provide NFCT additional information about trail conditions and usage.”²

Although the numbers were small (six) for the trial run of this course, the participants seemed to benefit. One student (fig. 2) stated,“I really enjoyed the fully immersed, completely independent environmental experience that the Northern Forest Canoe Trail Course offered. While taking this class I was able to complete a full time internship, receive course credits, take my family along and teach them a thing or two about the environment!”

Basic technological literacy and equipment were required for students enrolling in this course, including a digital cam- era, GPS, and computer, iPad, or iPhone for online connection to the campus Blackboard³ system for announcements, assignments, grades, discussions and other support activities. A Google account was required for participation in the Google+ virtual community. Links are provided to the various course documents.

About the Authors

Robert M. Sanford chairs the Department of Environmental Science & Policy at the University of Southern Maine, in Gorham, Maine. He is a SENCER Fellow and a co-director of the SENCER New England SCI.

Joseph K. Staples (PhD.) conducts research in the areas of forest ecology, environmental entomology & physiology, and integrated pest management in the Department of Environmental Science & Policy at the University of Southern Maine. He is a graduate of the Scholar Educator Program at Illinois State University and has taught more than thirty different courses in biology, ecology, and environmental science.

Footnotes

1. Karin Pires, Associate Director, Academic Programs, Professional & Continuing Education (PCE), University of Southern Maine, personal communication.
2. Will Plumley, NFCT Board of Directors, personal communication.
3. This description of the course assumes the use of Blackboard Learning System for course And Blackboard will be used to maintain an online confidential grade book. However, the final version of the course may use Google Community or other format as per the final syllabus.

Download (PDF, 1.76MB)

Introduction

Brownfield Action (BA) is a SENCER Model that is a web-based, interactive, three-dimensional digital space and learning simulation in which students form fictitious geotechnical consulting companies and work collectively to explore problems in environmental forensics. Created at Columbia University’s Barnard College in conjunction with Columbia’s Center for New Media Teaching and Learning, BA has a 12-year history of use at Barnard as a full semester activity in a two-semester Introduction to Environmental Science course. Each year more than 100 non-science majors take BA as an option to satisfy the College’s undergraduate science requirement. The pedagogical methods and design of BA are grounded in a substantial research literature focused on the design, use, and effectiveness of games and simulation in education (Bower et al. 2011). The variety of ways in which the BA simulation is used at Barnard and nine other educational institutions in the United States is described in Bower et al. (2014).

Although BA is web-based, there are components that are done in the classroom to complement the online instruction. The components include making topographic, bedrock, and groundwater maps; laboratory experiments to determine the porosity and permeability of sediment; and observation of the migration of a contaminant plume in a sand tank designed for that purpose. In this report we describe how we taught BA online to non-traditional students who use the course to satisfy an elective science requirement at the City College of New York (CCNY). The CCNY learning management system (LMS) is Blackboard 9.1, but any LMS can be used when teaching BA online. The course combined mainly asynchronous instruction, in which the students accessed course material and learned it outside the classroom at their leisure, and in-class instruction evenly spaced during the semester, when all of the students were present. It was in the classroom that students did laboratory experiments with equipment that would not be available away from the College. Examples of equipment that makes the learning experience meaningful to the students are sediment sieves for mechanical separation of regolith (sand) into different sizes or fractions, a triple-beam balance for measuring the mass of each sand fraction, a permeameter to measure the permeability coefficient needed in the calculation of the velocity of groundwater flow using D’Arcy’s Law, and a sand tank commercially obtained and designed to demonstrate the migration of a contaminated plume in groundwater.

Course Design

We used the constructionist approach (Murphy et al. 2005) to teaching BA as an asynchronous online course. An advantage of teaching BA asynchronously rather than having real-time (synchronous) communication between students and us is that it allowed the students to collapse time and space, to access the classes anywhere, and to get immediate feedback between themselves and us. Furthermore, we prefer authentic learning (Donovan et al. 1999) that involves the students in an investigation of a relevant issue such as a brownfield because it applies well to someone who lives in a large metropolitan area such as New York City. We are mindful that the success of the course depends much on structuring assignments so that the students see where the tasks they do help to lead to the eventual goal of the course, which is the drafting of an Environmental Site Assessment Phase I Report. We are fortunate to have more than a decade of experience developing and teaching face-to-face the assignments used in BA. Texts for the course are Jonathan Harr’s A Civil Action and Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring, which are accompanied by questions that direct the reading for each class.

Course Content

For faculty who intend to teach BA online, we offer here the lessons we developed for the course at CCNY. Each class consisted of a Lesson, Assignment, Discussion, Questions for reading assignments, and Resource, which was a PowerPoint presentation. The answers to the reading questions were known only to us and were not shared between students online. Student performance was assessed by weekly assignments and an Environmental Site Assessment Phase I Final Report.

During the first week of the course there were two three-hour classes when the students met with us on campus to make and interpret maps that are required for BA. Four additional classes during the semester when the students were together with us were when laboratory experiments were done to measure the porosity and permeability of regolith (sand), observe the contaminant plume in the sand tank model, and write the Environmental Site Assessment Phase I Report that was a requirement of the course. What follows is a description of the classes that can be used or adapted by other instructors when teaching BA online.

Class 1 consisted of a Lesson that described a brownfield and the design of the course. Because scale and a map of the region to be explored and topographic, bedrock, and water table maps are important in an environmental investigation of the kind that is done in BA, there was an explanation of the maps with all of the students present. The Discussion was for the students to write a paragraph telling their classmates and us something about themselves. As part of the biography, the students used the letters of their first name to describe traits they have. This activity served as an informal means of introducing the students to each other. An Assignment to be shared with everyone was for each student to select a park or similar site in his or her neighborhood and compute the area of that site. The intention of the assignment is to reinforce the concept of scale by comparing the area of the neighborhood site with the area of the base map (about 160 acres) and to Governor’s Island in New York Harbor, which was of similar area and a familiar locality to the students. Questions the students saw online about Chapter 1 in Silent Spring and A Civil Action were to be answered and sent to us before the next class; the biography using the letters of the first name was sent to everyone in the course. The Resource was a PowerPoint presentation about scale and the fictitious township that the students would investigate in the search for a brownfield. The class concluded with a video that described why an environmental site assessment is required for a parcel of land that a developer is considering buying; in this case, the land would be used to construct a mini-mall at the site of a former factory in Moraine Township, which is the fictitious township in the BA simulation.

The Lesson in Class 2 was devoted to a visual reconnaissance of Moraine Township. Because the reconnaissance is of about 160 acres, the task was divided among the students with each one assigned a sector of 20 acres. The Assignment required each student to report on the physical appearance of the landscape and position of buildings and roads in the sector. Students then combined the reports in the Discussion for use in a storyboard that would be a reference throughout the investigation. Questions about Chapter 2 in Silent Spring and A Civil Action were to be answered within seven days and sent only to us. The Resource was a PowerPoint presentation that had photographs and results of the regolith sieving lab that was done in Class 1.

The Lesson in Class 3 was for each student to locate and describe a brownfield in his or her neighborhood, and to report it to the entire class in the Discussion. The Assignment was to summarize the information that was learned in the visual reconnaissance of Moraine Township and to identify possible sites that required examination. This information also was to be communicated to the entire class in the Discussion. Questions about Chapter 3 in Silent Spring and A Civil Action were to be answered within seven days and sent only to us. The Resource was a PowerPoint presentation that had photographs of an abandoned gas station in Manhattan that is a brownfield.

The photographs gave the students an example of what might be a brownfield in their neighborhood.

Interviews with residents in Moraine Township have the potential to provide information that will be valuable in the search for a brownfield. Those interviews are possible in the BA simulation, and the Lesson in Class 4 was to have each student make several interviews from 20 possible ones. The Assignment was for each student to report the results of the interviews in the Discussion that was shared with everyone, and to add the responses to the storyboard for the investigation. Questions about Chapter 4 in Silent Spring and A Civil Action were to be answered within seven days and sent only to us. The Resource was a PowerPoint presentation containing information about how to conduct an interview in the BA simulation.

The students met with us in the classroom for Class 5. The Lesson was to introduce a plume (dye) into a sand tank designed to show how a contaminant moves from a point source in a well to a region of reduced confining pressure (pond). The Assignment was to calculate the rate of the groundwater flow using D’Arcy’s Law and to share the result in the Discussion. Questions about Chapter 5 in Silent Spring and A Civil Action were to be answered within seven days and sent only to us. The Resource was a PowerPoint presentation that showed the sand tank and explained the demonstration that was done with it. The class concluded with a showing of the CBS 60 Minutes interview with Anne Anderson, whose young son died from leukemia and who is a central character in A Civil Action.

Information from the interviews that were made in the Lesson for Class 4 and shared in the Discussion that week revealed that there might be subsurface pollution at the BTEX station that is located in the northwestern part of Moraine Township. The Lesson for Class 6 was to make a Soil Gas Sampling Analysis (SGSA) along a transect from the BTEX station to the municipal well that provides drinking water to the residents of Moraine Township. The SGSA survey is a geophysical method of detecting whether there is gasoline floating on the surface of the water table. The Assignment was for each student to make a measurement at a selected point along the transect and report the result in the Discussion for everyone to use. Questions about Chapter 6 in Silent Spring and A Civil Action were to be answered within seven days and sent only to us. The Resource was a PowerPoint presentation about the SGSA procedure, costs, and certification that is required before a measurement is made.

Because there was a positive SGSA result from the surveys in Class 6, the Lesson for Class 7 was to locate the underground storage tanks (UST) at the BTEX station. This is possible by doing a Magnetometry Metal Detection (MMD) investigation to locate the tanks before they are excavated. The Assignment was for each student to do the MMD survey in a square 10 feet on a side on the topographic map and to report the results to everyone in the Discussion. Questions about Chapter 7 in Silent Spring and A Civil Action were to be answered within seven days and sent only to us. The Resource was a PowerPoint presentation about the MMD procedure, cost, and required certification before making the measurement.

After locating the USTs with the MMD survey, the tanks were excavated in Class 8. The Lesson for Class 8 was for each student to excavate the site he or she explored in Lesson 7. The Assignment was to expose the USTs and for ones that are leaking (LUSTs) to report the results in the Discussion for each student to add to the base map of Moraine Township. Questions about Chapter 8 in Silent Spring and A Civil Action were to be answered within seven days and sent only to us. The Resource was a PowerPoint presentation about how to excavate an UST, the cost involved in doing that, and the certification required before excavation is begun.

In the Lesson for Class 9, the students were asked to review information that was obtained from the visual reconnaissance of Moraine Township, from interviews with business owners and their employees and from residents and government officials, the SGSA and MMD surveys, and excavations at the BTEX station. The Assignment was to draw conclusions from the information as it applied to the LUSTs at the BTEX station and to share the conclusions with classmates and us in the Discussion. A second Lesson in Class 9 was to do a Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) survey of the septic field at a former factory that is suspected to be the point source of the radioactive isotope tritium in the municipal water supply. As with the SGSA and MMD surveys, the sites for the GPR survey were assigned to different students. The Assignment was to report the findings of the survey to everyone in the course and to share it in a Discussion. Questions about Chapter 9 in Silent Spring and A Civil Action were to be answered within seven days and sent only to us. The Resource was a PowerPoint presentation about how to do a GPR survey, the cost, and certification required before the survey is begun.

The students were back in the classroom for Class 10 where the sand tank was used for the Lesson about the migration of a plume of vegetable dye from a point source to a region of reduced confining pressure, which is a pond. The Assignment was to calculate the rate of flow of the plume using D’Arcy’s Law and to share the answer with classmates in the Discussion. A laboratory activity was to measure the permeability coefficient of the regolith with a permeameter. Questions about Chapter 10 in Silent Spring and A Civil Action were to be answered within seven days and sent only to us. The Resource was a PowerPoint presentation about the use of the permeameter to obtain the permeability coefficient that is one of the factors in D’Arcy’s Law.

The Lesson for Class 11 was about radioactivity and the radioactive isotope tritium. The abandoned factory that will be the site of the proposed shopping center used tritium in the manufacture of some of its products. Because tritium is present in the drinking water used by residents in Moraine Township, it is important to find its source. Using the porosity and permeability constant of the regolith and the slope of the water table, the Assignment was to calculate the time in years that it would take for tritium to move in the groundwater from the factory to the municipal well. The answer to this assignment was shared in the Discussion. Questions about Chapter 11 in Silent Spring and A Civil Action were to be answered within seven days and sent only to us. The Resource was a PowerPoint presentation about radioactivity and nuclides, especially of tritium and its decay product, a beta particle.

The Lesson for Class 12 was an examination of reports about the quality of the drinking water in Moraine Township. The Assignment was to summarize the information that is relevant for the Environmental Site Assessment Phase I Report that is a requirement of the investigation. Each student shared his or her interpretation of the reports with classmates using the Discussion. Questions about Chapter 12 in Silent Spring and A Civil Action were to be answered within seven days and sent only to us. The Resource was a PowerPoint presentation showing a Water Report and providing information about how to interpret the Report.

The Lesson for Class 13 was to test the groundwater in Moraine Township by obtaining water samples from drill wells. Drilling was done along a transect where there was a suspected plume of hydrocarbon contamination from the LUST at the BTEX station, and along a transect from the septic field at the abandoned factory that used tritium as an energy source in the manufacture of some of its products. The Assignment was for each student to drill at a site along the transect and to report the results in the Discussion. Questions about Chapter 13 in Silent Spring and A Civil Action were to be answered within seven days and sent only to us. The Resource was a PowerPoint presentation that had instructions and guidelines about drilling so that money would not be spent unwisely at this phase of the investigation.

The Lessons for Classes 14 and 15, which were done in the classroom, were devoted to the writing of the Environmental Site Assessment Phase I Report that was a requirement of the investigation. The Assignments were for each student to draft a part of the report and share it with the entire class in the Discussions. Questions about Chapter 14 and 15 in Silent Spring and A Civil Action were to be answered within seven days and sent only to us. The Resource for Class 14 was a PowerPoint presentation with the instructions for the writing of the report. The Resource for Class 15 was a PowerPoint presentation that summarized the phases of the investigation and had instructions about completing the investigation, along with recommendations to be given to the prospective property owner regarding the environmental quality of the land being considered for the mini-mall. The course ended with a video that showed the two brownfields in Moraine Township and a three-dimensional simulation of their movement to the municipal water well from the BTEX station and from the abandoned factory that used tritium.

Summary

In order to preserve the integrity of BA when it is taught online, it should be framed as a “hybrid” course, as it is important that the students meet together with the instructor for some of the classes. The asynchronous part of the course allows students to collapse time and space; to access the classes anywhere; to get immediate feedback, tutoring, and coaching; and to receive real-time interaction between themselves and the instructor. For anyone who teaches an online course or intends to teach one, a resource that we found to be useful is The Complete Step-by-Step Guide to Designing & Teaching Online Courses by Joan Thormann and Isa Kaftal Zimmerman (2012).

About the Authors

Joseph Liddicoat is an Adjunct Professor at the City College of New York where he teaches the Core Science curriculum and elective science courses, one of which is Brownfield Action. Retired from Barnard College, he has been part of the development of Brownfield Action with Peter Bower and others for nearly 15 years. He received his A.B in English Literature and Language from Wayne State University in Detroit, MI, which is his home town, and graduate degrees in Earth Science from Dartmouth College (A.M.) and University of California, Santa Cruz (Ph.D.).

Peter Bower, conservationist and educator, is a Senior Lecturer in the Department of Environmental Science at Barnard College/Columbia University, where he has taught for 29 years. He has been involved in research, conservation, and education in the Hudson River Valley for 35 years. He is the creator of the Brownfield Action selected as a National SENCER Model Curriculum in 2003 and is a SENCER Fellow. This innovative curriculum includes a web-based, interactive, digital space and simulation, in which student“consulting companies” explore and solve problems in environmental forensics (see www.brownfieldaction.org). He has also developed and taught courses in field methods, environmental law, environmental hazards and disasters, waste management, energy resources, and the Hudson River ecosystem, among others. He is a recipient of Barnard College’s Emily Gregory Award for excellence in teaching. He has also served as acting executive director of the Black Rock Forest Consortium in Cornwall, New York, where he managed and directed the staff and facilities of a 3,785-acre forest and oversaw its research, educational, and conservation activities. He is the former Mayor of Teaneck, New Jersey, where he served on the City Council, Planning Board, and Environmental Commission for eight years. He received his B.S. in geology from Yale, M.A. in geology from Queens, and Ph.D. in geochemistry from Columbia.

References

Bower, P., R. Kelsey, and F. Moretti, 2011. “Brownfield Action: An Inquiry-based Multimedia Simulation for Teaching and Learning Environmental Science.” Science Education and Civic Engagement 3 (1): 5–14. http://seceij.net/seceij/winter11/brownfield_acti.html

(accessed December 19, 2014).

Bower, P., R. Kelsey, B. Bennington, L.D. Lemke, J. Liddicoat, B. Sorice Miccio, A. Lampousis, D.M. Thompson, B. Greenbaum Seewald, A.D. Kney, T. Graham, and S. Datta, 2014. “Brownfield Action: Dissemination of a SENCER Model Curriculum and the Creation of a Collaborative STEM Education Network.” Science Education and Civic Engagement 6 (1): 5–21. http://seceij.net/ secei/winter 14/brownfield_acti.html (accessed December 19, 2014).

Carson, R. 2002. Silent Spring. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. Donovan, M.S., J.D. Bradsford, and J.W. Pellegrino, eds. 1999. How People Learn: Bridging Research and Practice. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.

Harr, J. 1996. A Civil Action. New York: Vintage Books. Murphy, K., S.E. Mahoney, C.Y. Chen, N. Mendoza-Diaz, and X.

Yang. 2005. “A Constructionist Model of Mentoring, Coaching, and Facilitating Online Discussions.” Distance Education 26 (3): 341–355.

Thormann, J., and I.K. Zimmerman. 2012. The Complete Step-by- Step Guide to Designing & Teaching Online Courses. New York: Teachers College Press.

Supplemental Course Materials

Class PowerPoints:

https://serc.carleton.edu/download/files/65107/ClassPowerpoints.zip

Class Lessons:

https://serc.carleton.edu/download/files/65104/ClassLessons.zip

Class Discussions (Forums):

https://serc.carleton.edu/download/files/65101/ClassDiscussions.zip

Silent Spring Questions:

https://serc.carleton.edu/download/files/65110/SilentSpringQuestions.zip

A Civil Action Questions:

https://serc.carleton.edu/download/files/65098/ACivilActionQuestions.zip

Link to Brownfield Action

http://brownfield.ccnmtl.columbia.edu

Download (PDF, 1.94MB)

Abstract

By the year 2016, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) aims to make the Chicago River an area designated for primary contact recreational use, where people can swim in the water without being harmed by water-borne pathogens from raw sewage contamination (EPA 2011). In recent years, recreational use of the Chicago River has been increasing. Currently only three of the Chicagoland area’s water reclamation plants disinfect their wastewater (Oh 2012). The focus of this research project was to determine the coliform count and identify the bacteria within the Chicago River. This mission was performed by undergraduate students enrolled in a microbiology research course centered on project-based learning (PBL) at Harold Washington College (HWC). This endeavor allowed students to learn basic laboratory skills currently used in the field of microbiology and apply them in a real-world scenario. In addition, the students learned the value of collaborative learning and research, along with its outcomes. The results of this project can serve to engage the public by educating them about the pollution in the Chicago River, an invaluable resource shared by many locals and tourists in the Chicagoland area.

Introduction

If there is magic on this planet, it is contained in water, and the Chicago River is a testament to that (Eiseley 1959). The Chicago River has played a critical role in the history of Chicago and continues to be utilized to this day. As has been often repeated, the city of Chicago owes its existence to the Chicago River, and the river owes its present form to Chicago. Geographically speaking, had it not been for the river’s location between Lake Michigan and the Des Plaines River, Chicago would never have become one of the nation’s central transshipment points (Hill 2000). Since that time, the Chicago River has come a long way from being a cesspool to today’s recreational hot spot.

In the nineteenth century, city sewers drained into the Chicago River, which emptied into Lake Michigan. This posed a health hazard, as the lake supplied the city’s drinking water (Brown, 2002). In 1900, the completion of the Sanitary and Ship Canal reversed the flow of the Chicago River to direct sewage away from the lake, and after 1922, water treatment plants were established. Today, the Chicago River is used for recreational purposes where tourists hop aboard tour boats and water taxis. Some residents kayak on the river despite the fact that it sometimes receives bad press due to its polluted ecosystem. The EPA’s goal is to designate the Chicago River as an area safe for primary contact recreation use by 2016, meaning that people will be able to enjoy direct contact between their skin and the water without being harmed by waterborne pathogens from raw sewage contamination (EPA 2011). Moreover, Mayor Rahm Emanuel has launched a development project for the Chicago Riverwalk, attracting residents and tourists alike to enjoy activities along the main branch of the river. However, only three out of seven of the Chicagoland area’s water reclamation plants currently sanitize their wastewater before pumping the effluent back out into the river (Oh 2012).

The main goals of this research are to:

1. Show the impact of learning that resulted in civic engagement through project-based learning conducted by undergraduates.
2. Demonstrate the ability of two-year college students, when given the opportunity, to engage and conduct critical research such as the investigation of water quality in the Chicago River, and to supply results and outcomes that could make a difference in the quality of life around the Such work is at the core of civic engagement.
3. Investigate the water contamination level in the Chicago River by determining the coliform count and bacterial identification. Coliforms are gram-negative bacteria that originate from the large intestines of warm-blooded animals and are therefore used as an indicator of fecal If coliforms are found in water, other pathogenic bacteria may be present as well. Pathogens commonly found in wastewater effluents include Escherichia coli, Streptococcus, Salmonella, Shigella, mycobacterium, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Giardia lamblia, and enteroviruses (North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services 2011).

This investigation was carried out as part of an interdisciplinary microbiology research course that was designed and taught based on Project-Based Learning (PBL) methods. There is no doubt that the ways we teach and engage students in learning affect students’ attitudes toward, and performance in, college-level courses. Educating our students within the classroom about science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) is not enough. Science is not simply what students learn from textbooks or from a traditional passive learning environment. Students need to be taught how science is practiced, because it is through science and math that our world is rapidly evolving, with new discoveries being made through inquiry and experimental research. Teaching students scientific concepts through engagement in scientific inquiry and empirical research enables them to understand how math and science fields play a critical role in our society and in our everyday life. When students experience this through hands-on learning and empirical research, their creativity and intellectual boundaries are expanded, and their problem-solving skills and cognitive abilities improve and advance. It has been shown that students learn more effectively when they are engaged in hands-on learning experiences directed by students themselves (Brickman et al. 2009).

PBL has the potential to be a highly effective teaching method that fully engages students and leads them to success in mastering the course material. It greatly increases student motivation to learn course material, due to the impact of connections made outside of the conventional classroom setting. It is an alternative approach to education that encourages students to seek solutions to challenging and relevant problems and to bridge the gap between school and the real world (Doles 2012). In addition, the PBL method allo­­ws the student to retain the course material for a longer period of time than the methods employed in a traditional course. A study performed by Cherif, Movahedzadeh, Adams, and Dunning on why students fail in college-level courses, presented at the Higher Learning Commission (HLC) conference in 2013, revealed that lack of motivation is among the most common factors that contribute to student academic failure (Cherif et al. 2013). Lack of motivation was also recognized by many faculty members as one of the root causes of student failure (Cherif et al. 2014). When students realize the significance of the subject being taught and how it relates to their lives, they are more likely to become motivated and engaged. A PBL environment may also change the attitude a student has towards a course or career path (Chang et al. 2011). This is significant, especially because it has been documented that 50 percent of students seeking an associate degree require remediation, while 20.7 percent of those seeking a bachelor degree require remediation (The State of College & Career Readiness 2013). PBL is an innovative and promising teaching method that imparts to students the skills needed to compete and succeed in STEM field jobs. PBL teaches students important skills such as critical thinking, collaboration with others, taking responsibility for their learning, and time management, among others. PBL is a key learning methodology that prepares students with the skills that are required by employers in STEM fields. Today employers expect professionals not only to hold strong technical skills, but also to be able to work well in teams, manage their time efficiently, multitask, and effectively communicate information gathered from a variety of sources (AACC 2010). Students in PBL classrooms learn and continuously exercise these important skills. Positive outcomes have been revealed at universities such as Southern Connecticut State University (SCSU), where students in a general chemistry course completed a project of their choice related to chemistry. The majority of the students had a positive sense of having gained an “understanding of the multi-disciplinary nature of societal issues” and how chemistry aids in addressing real-world issues (Webb 2013). Similarly, this research project revealed the important role biotechnology plays in our society as a means of addressing issues such as water contamination.

We are rapidly moving forward with advancing technology, but there is a lack of skilled and qualified personnel adequately equipped with knowledge in using such advancements. If we are quickly developing innovative technology through research and development, and the demand for skilled workers, such as lab technicians, is ever increasing, then why are students not being taught the skills employers are looking for or the skills necessary to succeed in STEM field jobs? As we will show, PBL methodology grants students opportunities to learn to be self-directed in their education and to acquire the skills they need.

The research project discussed in this paper incorporated the use of current microbiology techniques for students to investigate water contamination in the Chicago River. Integrating PBL in science courses can inspire students to pursue science-related careers. Moreover, these types of projects can positively impact students and encourage them to engage pressing issues in their community and educate the public about such issues. The results of this research call for civic engagement, because the Chicago River is a dynamic resource that is shared and utilized by countless residents of Chicago for various purposes. Given support and minimal resources, students at the community college level are able to actively participate and flourish in research that both recognizes and addresses matters concerning their society and their environment.

Materials and Methods

Undergraduates were tasked with planning and implementation in all of the aspects of this course, including but not limited to the design of and participation in sampling, testing, research, and synthesis of information.

Sample collection

Water samples were obtained on two separate occasions under two diverse weather conditions. Samples were taken from one location, under the Wabash Avenue Bridge, during inclement weather when torrential rains precipitated the opening of the locks leading from the Chicago River into Lake Michigan due to flooding (April 18, 2013). Water samples reflecting dry weather and normal river conditions were collected at five sites along the Chicago River (fig. 1) on a separate day approximately two weeks later (May 3, 2013). In selecting the sites for the testing samples, covering a large area along the river across multiple neighborhoods where residents use the river in various ways was desired. Samples were collected using a one-liter graduated pitcher attached to an eight-foot pole. Two water samples per location were collected from approximately six feet below the surface, poured into collection bottles, and taken to the microbiology lab at Harold Washington College (HWC) for analysis.

Bacterial Count

To determine coliform counts, serial dilutions of 1:1, 1:10, 1:100, and 1:1000 were made from the samples taken during dry normal conditions as they more accurately reflect the ongoing contamination of the Chicago River. MacConkey’s agar plates were inoculated with 100 µL of each dilution. After incubation at 37º C for 24–48 hours, colony-forming units (CFUs) were determined. Final results represent the average of both samples per location as shown in table 1. While the applied approach may differ from the methods utilized by the Metropolitan Water Reclamation District (MWRD) plants, the way we submitted the report of the colony count is the standard method and comparable to theirs.

Culture Identification

Bacterial differentiation began by inoculating 100 µL of each non-diluted sample onto the following media: MacConkey’s agar, blood agar, Eosinmethylene blue agar (EMB), and triple sugar agar (TSA). After overnight incubation at 37° C, gram negative colonies were selected and isolated to inoculate into nutrient broth for further testing.

Biochemical Identification of Isolates

In addition to the IMViC tests, the following biochemical tests were performed for bacterial differentiation: glucose broth (with and without oil), lactose broth, nitrate broth, gelatin agar, starch agar, spirit blue agar, phenylalanine deaminase, methyl red/ Voges Proskauer, esculin hydrolysis, urea hydrolysis, oxidase and catalase production. To confirm the identification, Enterotube Multitest System (BD BBL, USA) was used for each sample and incubated at 37º C for 24–48 hours. Results from all tests were determined (table 1) using the Bergey’s Manual of Determinative Bacteriology (1994).

Results

Testing the water in the Chicago River led to the isolation of coliforms like Pseudomonas aeruginosa (fig. 2, originating from flood water sample), Escherichia coli and opportunistic pathogens like Enterobacter agglomerans and Serratia odorifera (table 1). Since the presence of coliform bacteria was suspected, a series of biochemical tests was designed to investigate the fermentation and oxidation properties of the isolates. The bacteria were first tested for their ability to ferment lactose, since bacteria commonly found in water, such as E.coli, are lactose fermenters. The inoculated MacConkey agar plates displayed smooth, round, pink colonies which denoted lactose fermentation. All the results were confirmed using Enterotube Multitest System. Based on the series of biochemical tests performed, the resulting physiological characteristics were matched to the isolated enterobacteria (table 1).

Bacterial counts obtained by the undergraduates conducting this project are comparable to bacterial counts obtained by the MWRD after weekly testing of effluent wastewater released from both its O’Brien Water Reclamation Plant and Calumet Water Reclamation Plant between 2005 and 2010 (MWRD 2011). The bacterial count obtained from Site 3 had a higher count than the highest recorded at the Calumet Water Reclamation Plant (120,000 CFUs /100 mL), yet lower than the highest count recorded at the O’Brien Water Reclamation Plant (200,000 CFUs /100 mL) (MWRD 2011). Site 5, where the lowest number of CFUs were recorded by undergraduates, had a count above the minimum CFUs reported at the O’Brien Water Reclamation Plant (660 CFUs /100 mL) (MWRD 2011). All sites where students obtained samples are located approximately eight to ten miles downstream from the O’Brien Water Reclamation Plant.

While a total of six sites were randomly selected for this investigation, no specific reports have been found regarding these sites. The implication of the findings is that there is urgent need to make the river safe as a recreational place for Chicago residents.

Discussion

As evidenced by the results, this research focuses on what students can and do achieve when given the opportunity to learn through PBL and undergraduate research. It also demonstrates the ability of undergraduate students at the community college level to give back to society. The central point is the impact of the learning that resulted from this type of civic engagement conducted by undergraduates, including what they could contribute to help the community in making in- formed decisions related to safety and the quality of the river. This project was part of an interdisciplinary course in which faculty and students at Harold Washington College pursued work on various aspects of the Chicago River. The Chicago Waterways Project, as conducted, provided students with the opportunity to discover by themselves what civic engagement and community service are all about.

The evaluation of students’ feedback revealed that appreciation for the project’s role in highlighting the significance of the Chicago River and appreciation for being part of something special were the major themes identified. Serving and giving back to the community was another key topic they mentioned. The average retention rate at HWC is 67 percent, in this course a retention rate of 88 percent was achieved. Upon assessment of the members of the microbiology section within this interdisciplinary class, 100 percent of the participants had either successfully transferred as a science major to a four-year institution or had been accepted in professional career programs. The success of this small model has tremendously encouraged us to use PBL with a civic engagement purpose in larger-scale future classes.

As part of this interdisciplinary research project at HWC, the result of this study was presented as a poster that was visited by members from the seven City Colleges of Chicago and the general public. The result was also presented orally to the attendees at the national conferences of the American Association of University Administrators (AAUA) and the Association of American Colleges and Universities (AACU) (Martyn and Movahedzadeh 2014; Martyn et al. 2013).

Given that the EPA aims to make the Chicago River an area designated for primary contact recreational use by 2016, the research project described in this paper had a significant purpose: to enable students from a microbiology research course with a PBL emphasis to develop and complete a

project that investigated the contamination of the Chicago River. Through this process, the students were inspired and empowered, recognizing that they had an important role to play both in contributing to the collective body of research focused on the Chicago River’s ecosystem and in increasing citizens’ awareness of existent public health concerns. The outcome of this research brought valuable results to the populace and invaluable skills to the students, enabling them to demonstrate the intrinsic value of civic engagement.

The water samples collected revealed the presence of enterobacteria in the Chicago River. These bacteria are coliform bacteria, indicating that fecal contamination is likely. Contamination in the water could be due to the fact that currently only three out of seven of Chicago’s water reclamation plants disinfect their wastewater before pumping the effluent back out into the area waterways. Furthermore, it is worth noting that none of these three disinfecting plants sit adjacent to the Chicago River or serve the City of Chicago directly; thus these plants’ contribution of clean water to the river is not as significant as that of the contaminated sources. The Chicago River is a resource widely used for recreation by local residents and guests visiting Chicago. It is troubling to discover and report such a high number of CFUs. To add some perspective, consider standards applied along the shore of Lake Michigan, another source of recreational water use in Chicago. The Illinois Department of Public Health’s regulations contain a maximum standard for fecal coliform bacteria at 500 CFUs /100 mL at area beaches (Illinois Department of Public Health 2015). It is imperative to pay attention to the state of the river’s water quality, as new development along the beautified pedestrian walkways attract residents and tourists alike.

Through this research project, students acquired and improved upon skills currently employed in the microbial research/clinical setting. Nevertheless, the skills learned in this project go beyond the mastery of technical skills and practices in the laboratory. This project provided students a chance to further develop skills that will be useful in their future professions and daily lives, such as responsibility, critical thinking, self-motivation, collaboration, and communication. The concepts presented in the classroom and applied in the field fostered a more profound understanding and a greater appreciation of the biological sciences and how they can be applied directly to help address real world issues.

This research project revealed the significant role that technology plays in our society when utilized to address critical problems such as water contamination. It also attests to the importance and the value of civic engagement in college education. Students participating in this PBL course developed a profound personal attachment to effecting positive change in both the environment and their communities. A similar example can be found in a PBL based calculus II course at Roosevelt University, where semester-long projects have been incorporated into the course curriculum. The project topics vary from HIV/AIDs to wealth distribution, and include the mathematical topics being taught in the course. These projects have allowed the students to “understand the quantitative aspects of civic issues using models that rely on calculus for their construction” (González-Arévalo and Pivarski 2013). In addition, students gained an enhanced ap- preciation of mathematics and its applications in other fields (González-Arévalo and Pivarski 2013). PBL enables students to increase their knowledge while challenging them to think critically and teaching them to design and direct a project of their own. This work unifies the students’ initiative to direct their own learning and to accept responsibility for their education. At HWC, PBL had previously been successfully integrated in a biotechnology lab course where students demonstrated a high level of performance and satisfaction (Movahedzadeh et al. 2012). Moreover, students indicated that this experience supported their cognitive development and self-confidence and stimulated the idea of continuing their education beyond the associate degree level (Movahedzadeh et al. 2012). With minimal funding and support, students can be enriched with hands-on knowledge that breaks the traditional forms of teaching. PBL could be used as an effective vehicle guiding students to civic engagement while obtaining the skills needed to succeed in their higher learning and in their future professions through an active connection with their environment.

Interesting results were found testing the water of the Chicago River. Coliforms like E. coli, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and the opportunistic pathogens Enterobacter agglomerans and Serratia odorifera were isolated. Students found it imperative to instruct river enthusiasts and the broader community at large of the existence of coliforms and ways to reduce the risk of infection due to exposure from opportunistic pathogens. Simple precautions recommended to avoid water-borne illness when swimming or playing in or on the water include proper hand washing, showering before and after water exposure, refraining from recreational activities in water that is stagnant with dead fish, refraining from digging in or stirring up the sediment while taking part in water-related activities in shallow and warm freshwater areas, and promptly tending to any wounds, cuts, or abrasions suffered in or near the water (North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services 2011).

The Chicago River has received bad press due to the polluted status of its ecosystem. These findings reveal the importance of seeking solutions to improve the water quality of the Chicago River. This is vital, especially since recreational activities are on the rise along the Chicago River. The solution could be disinfecting the wastewater from all seven reclamation plants before pumping the effluent back into the waterway system. We propose that there should be a collaborative effort that includes students from the City Colleges of Chicago. Instead of wasting materials on lab exercises divorced from real-world applications, students would prefer to assist in efforts aimed at continually improving and monitoring the standards of our communal waterway, having already demonstrated their willingness and competence to do so. Our laboratories are capable of contributing to the success of these efforts.

The primary goal of this research project was to engage students in the learning process and to create an educational environment where meaningful learning was not only possible, but would actually occur. Students explored conceptual meanings and implications throughout the learning processes contained in this PBL course. Furthermore, students gained vital experience by participating in the Chicago Waterways Project, where they applied what had been previously learned exclusively in the didactic classroom. This learning experience was further enriched when students tackled the problem of contamination in the Chicago River, an issue that must be addressed due to its potential to affect public health. It is hoped that this research will motivate students and the public to take action in the restoration of the river. Involving college students in research projects such as these reveals to them the impact they can have on society and how important their participation is in addressing these issues. PBL demonstrates to students that the scholastic subjects they may deem uninteresting or useless play an integral role in addressing the problems of society, in this case, the quality of the Chicago River. With encouragement and minimal financial resources students can gain a world of knowledge beyond the classroom and thrive by applying that knowledge to engage the issues in the world around them.

Acknowledgements

Research reported in this paper was supported by The City Colleges of Chicago Annual Plan funding under award number 12-450.

About the Authors

Farah Movahedzadeh, Ph.D., is an associate professor and currently the co-Chair of the Department of Biological Sciences at Harold Washington College in Chicago, Illinois. She received a doctorate degree in Clinical Lab Sciences from Medical Sciences University of Iran, and a Ph.D. in Molecular Biology and Microbiology from the University College of London (UCL) and the National Institute for Medical Research (NIMR). She was elected as a SENCER Leadership Fellow in 2012. Her skills and areas of expertise include molecular biology, microbiology, clinical lab sciences, hybrid/blended teaching, and project-based learning. She also actively pursues her research on essential genes as drug targets for tuberculosis at the College of Pharmacy in the University of Illinois at Chicago. She has published research articles in both basic science and in pedagogy and scholarship of teaching.

Margie Martyn, Ph.D., is the Interim President at Harold Washington College, one of the City Colleges of Chicago. Previously, Dr. Martyn served as Vice President of Academic Affairs for Harold Washington College. She earned a B.S. from Michigan State University, an MBA from Baldwin-Wallace College, and a Ph.D. in Instructional Technology with a minor in Computer Science from The University of Akron. Dr. Martyn has experience as a faculty member, teaching both graduate and undergraduate courses in adult learning, computer literacy, mathematics literacy, liberal arts and sciences, management, telecommunications, and networking. She has published articles on the impact of technology on student learning outcomes and engagement.

Adrienne Linzemann is currently enrolled in the associate degree nursing program at Truman College in Chicago, Illinois. She intends to continue her nursing education after graduation. Her interests include microbiology, health promotion, and travel.

Elsa Quintero received her Bachelor of Science in Biology from the University of Illinois at Chicago in 2012. She is currently pursuing a bachelor’s degree in Medical Laboratory Science at Rush University.

Jose Aveja continued his education at Northeastern University in Chicago, Illinois. He is an avid photographer drawn to ornithology.

William Thompson is a senior lab technician in the Department of Biological Sciences at Harold Washington College in Chicago, Illinois. This year he begins his 35th year of service with the City Colleges of Chicago. He is passionate about biology, microbiology, and clinical lab sciences.

References

AACC, American Association of Community Colleges. 2010. Fact Sheet. http://www.aacc.nche.edu/AboutCC/Documents/Archive/fact- sheet2010.pdf (accessed January 24, 2015).

Brickman, P., C. Gormally, N. Armstrong, and B. Hallar. 2009. “Effects of Inquiry-based Learning on Students’ Science Literacy Skills and Confidence.” International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning 3 (2): 1–22.

Brown, J.L. (2002). Reversal of the Chicago River, Civil Engineering, no. 72: 110-111. Retrieved from: Academic Search Complete, EBSCOhost

Chang, C., W. Chen, S. Lou, and K. Tseng. 2011. “Attitudes towards Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) in a Project-based Learning (PBL) Environment.” International Journal of Technology and Design Education 23: 81–102.

Cherif, A., G. Adams, F. Movahedzadeh, M. Martyn, and J. Dunning. 2014. “Why Do Students Fail? Faculty’s Perspective.” Collection of Papers from the Annual Conference published by the Higher Learning Commission. http://cop.hlcommission.org/Learning-Environments/cherif.html (accessed January 24, 2015).

Cherif, A., F. Movahedzadeh, G. Adams, and J. Dunning. 2013 “Why Do Students Fail?” Higher Learning Commission: A Collection of Papers on Self-Study and Institutional Improvement 29: 35–51.

Doles, K. 2012. “What is Project-Based Learning?” Frontline. PBS. July 17, 2012. Television. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/education/fast-times-at-west-philly-high/what-is-project-based-learning/ (accessed January 24, 2015).

Eiseley, L. 1959. The Immense Journey. New York: Vintage Books. Environmental Protection Agency (2011). Summary of EPA’s Actions on Illinois’ New and Revised Water Quality Standards for the CAWS and LDPR. (2011). http://www.epa.gov/region5/chicagoriver/pdfs/ caws-summary-20120510.pdf

González-Arévalo, B., & Pivarski, M. (2013). The Real-World Connection: Incorporating Semester-Long Projects into Calculus II. Science Education and Civic Engagement 5:1: 17-24. http://seceij.net/seceij/ winter13/real_world_conn.html

Hill, L. 2000. The Chicago River: A Natural and Unnatural History. Chicago: Claremont Press.

Illinois Department of Public Health. 2015. Bathing Beaches. http:// www.dph.illinois.gov/topics-services/environmental-health-protection/recreation/bathing-beaches (accessed January 24, 2015).

Martyn, M., and F. Movahedzadeh. 2014. “Undergraduate Research: The Final Frontier.” Paper presented at the conference of the American Association of University Administrators (AAUA). Washington, DC: April 25–26. http://www.aaua.org/seminar-program-details.htm (accessed January 24, 2015).

Martyn, M., F. Movahedzadeh, and S. Burke. 2013. Chicago Waterways: STEM to STEAM. Paper presented at Transforming STEM Education: Innovation, Inquiry, and Evidence, conference of the American Association of Colleges and Universities: San Diego, October 31–November 2. http://www.aacu.org/events/chicago-waterways-stem-steam (accessed January 24, 2015).

Movahedzadeh, F., R. Patwell, J.E. Rieker, and T. Gonzalez. 2012. “Project-Based Learning to Promote Effective Learning in Biotechnology Courses.” Education Research International. Article ID 536024.

MWRD, Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of Greater Chicago. Disinfection Task Force. 2011. Evaluation of Disinfection Technologies for the Calumet and North Side Water Reclamation Plants: Technical Memorandum 2, 4–17.

North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services. 2011. Avoiding Recreational Water Illnesses. http://epi.publichealth.nc.gov/cd/ water/prevent.html (accessed January 24, 2015).

Oh, G. 2012. “Coming Clean: Swimmable Chicago River To Become Reality.” Medill Reports, Northwestern University.

The State of College & Career Readiness: Part 1. Infographic. 2013. http://www.pearsonlearningsolutions.com/blog/wp-content/ uploads/2013/05/college-readiness-infographic3.pdf (accessed January 24, 2015).

Webb, Jeffrey A. 2013. “Integrating SENCER into a Large Lecture General Education Chemistry Course.” Science Education and Civic Engagement 5 (2).

Download (PDF, 1.41MB)