Download BIO 34 assessment fall 2012

BIO 34/HUMAN GENETICS ASSESSMENT
fall 2011
Instructor: Rebecca Loomis
Moreno Valley College
FALL 2011
The SLO’s for BIO 34 have been re-written and condensed into fewer SLO’s and have recently
been officially changed in the current course outline. The course outline has also been updated
and submitted through the Curicunet process for final approval
The proposed SLO’s will now be:
1. Understand the concepts and patterns related with various types of genetic inheritance
including:
a) Autosomal dominant and recessive inheritance
b) Sex-linked, sex influenced and sex-limited inheritance
c) Mitochondrial inheritance
d) Single gene/allele pair vs. multiple allele or polygenic inheritance
2. Demonstrate an understanding of all modes of inheritance by interpreting patterns in
pedigrees and determining probable outcomes in monohybrid and dihybrid inheritance
problems and Hardy-Weinburg fluctuations in human populations.
3. Identify specific events or environmental factors that occur during the processes of DNA
replication, transcription, translation and gamete formation/embryonic development that
can lead to DNA mutations or influence gene expression.
4. Discuss genetic disorders and clinical applications using current information, terms and
concepts.
SLO Assessed:
In my last assessment of this course I included some questions in the assessment that
tested for SLO # 3 since this is a new SLO that has not been previously assessed:
Identify specific events or environmental factors that occur during the processes of
DNA replication, transcription, translation and gamete formation/embryonic
development that can lead to DNA mutations or influence gene expression.
The last (fall 2011) assessment showed a low 60% overall success rate for questions
pertaining to this SLO as opposed to a 78% success rate for questions pertaining to SLO
#1. For this reason I chose to focus on SLO #3 since the success rate was low and my
goal was to increase the overall success on topics relating to this SLO.
Method of Assessment:
A total of 43 questions were included in weekly quizzes, sectional exams and the
semester final exam that measured the competency of the students in the area of student
learning outcome #3. These 43 questions were divided into four subtopics as to narrow
down success within specific content areas of the SLO:
1. Questions pertaining to the influence of teratogens during embryonic/fetal
development.
2. Questions regarding specific mutation types and causes (frameshift,
Spontaneous, point, germline vs. somatic mutations, nondisjunction etc.)
and locations/DNA patterns that make mutations more likely.
3. Gene expression controls including environmental and genetic influences.
4. Cell cycle checkpoints and mechanisms utilized to limit mutations.
By dividing the questions pertaining to the SLO into 4 areas it allows a more fine-tuned
assessment that may indicate specific areas of difficulty for student comprehension
within the chosen SLO.
An item analysis was performed for each quiz or exam included in the assessment. The
answers given for the 43 questions pertaining to the given SLO were singled out,
analyzed and the overall success for each question was computed. In addition, the
percentage of correct responses was averaged for the questions from each SLO.
Results:
Of the 43 questions assessing SLO #3, the average for correct response was 72% overall
(average correct responses from all 43 questions for the entire class). This average is
much better than the 60% success rate on the same SLO in the previous semester.
The lowest average for correct responses was 66% overall for questions pertaining
specifically to subdivision 3 of the SLO (gene expression controls). This area of
epigenetics is fairly new and fast moving. It has only been within the last 10 years that
scientists have gained a better understanding of mechanisms such as microRNA controls,
methylation, imprinting etc. and environmental/inutero influences on these controls. It is
likely that this is the first time students have been introduced to such topics. Therefore it
is understandable that this area may be the most difficult to grasp since it seems so
foreign and abstract to most individuals.
The other 3 subtopic results were as follows:.
1. Subtopic 1 (Questions pertaining to the influence of teratogens during
embryonic/fetal development)= 77% correct responses.
2. Subtopic 2 (Questions regarding specific mutation types and causes)= 75%
correct responses.
3. Subtopic 4 (Cell cycle checkpoints and mechanisms utilized to limit
mutations)= 79% correct responses.
Subtopics 1 and 3 contain subject matter most likely to have been encountered by
students in previous science courses (such as BIO 1 or Health Science). These are also
easier topics to comprehend. Therefore it is realistic to expect students to score better on
these topics. Subtopic 2 is new subject matter for most students and in addition the
content is somewhat more difficult. I feel a success rate of 75% in this area is a fairly
good outcome.
It is not unexpected that scoring on SLO #3 was on the average lower than that for SLO
#1. The topics encompassed and the knowledge necessary for comprehension of this
topic (including DNA replication, transcription, translation, imprinting, meiosis etc.) are
generally the most difficult topics for students to master. However, the marked
improvement on this SLO from the previous year indicates that a higher percentage of
students are mastering these concepts.
In the previous assessment I noted that the questions with the lowest overall success were
all multiple/multiple constructed questions except one. In the last assessment I
mentioned that the format of the question might actually be a major consideration on the
outcome. With this current information, I would have to conclude that the construction
of the question may in fact be a bigger influence on the outcome than the content of the
question. In the next assessment I would like to assess the question format and its
influence on correct response rather than assessing a specific SLO. Somehow the
assessment process has failed to consider such influences and instead focuses only on
SLO’s when, in fact, question format could be a greater influence on correct response
than knowledge of the content.
Future Changes to Curriculum:
I feel a 72% overall success rate for this difficult of a topic is a good result especially
considering a 60% success rate from the previous year. I’m not sure a change in
curriculum is necessary in this case. Hopefully as the area of epigenetics becomes more
public knowledge and is mentioned in other courses it will feel more familiar to students.
My goal is to give the students a solid understanding of the concepts so they may
continue to read about current scientific advances in these areas and understand the
information. This course is a survey of human genetics and this topic is highly advanced
for a survey course.
As an anatomy/physiology instructor I was taught to include multiple/multiple type
questions in all exams in order to prepare students for their state board exams (which
extensively incorporate these type of questions). Given the low success on these types of
questions in BIO 34, I have to wonder if this type of question is necessary since many of
these students will never encounter board exams. On the next assessment I intend to
differentiate between question format and correct responses.
Unfortunately there is no pre-requisite for this course. Many students in this class have
never taken a previous college level science course. Those students who have taken
biology, microbiology or anatomy/physiology prior to this course seem to understand
more easily and master the material to a higher degree. Perhaps a pre-requisite for the
course would increase retention and comprehension, or it is possible that without a prerequisite the level of material covered should be reduced to more general information.
I would hate to reduce the level of material offered or decrease my expectations for the
course since previous semesters have shown higher success rates. Discussions with
faculty teaching the course at the other two colleges have been initiated to compare the
level of information being offered in the course elsewhere. All of the instructors of BIO
34 are in agreement that the information covered is appropriate. Modification of the
SLO’s was completed to reflect our conversation.