Dataset Information

A Progressive Reading, Writing, and Artistic Module to Support Scientific Literacy.

ABSTRACT: Scientific literacy, marked by the ability and willingness to engage with scientific information, is supported through a new genre of citizen science-course-based research in association with undergraduate laboratories. A three-phased progressive learning module was developed to enhance student engagement in such contexts while supporting three learning outcomes: I) present an argument based on evidence, II) analyze science and scientists within a social context, and III) experience, reflect upon, and communicate the nature of scientific discovery. Phase I entails guided reading and reflection of citizen science-themed texts. In Phase II, students write, peer-review, and edit position and counterpoint papers inspired by the following prompt, "Nonscientists should do scientific research." Phase III involves two creative assignments intended to communicate the true nature of science. Students work collaboratively to develop public service announcement-like poster campaigns to debunk a common misconception about the nature of science or scientists. Individually, they create a work of art to communicate a specific message about the raw experience of performing scientific research. Suggestions for implementation and modifications are provided. Strengths of the module include the development of transferable skills, temporal distribution of grading demands, minimal in-class time needed for implementation, and the inclusion of artistic projects to support affective learning domains. This citizen science-themed learning module is an excellent complement to laboratory coursework, as it serves to surprise, challenge, and inspire students while promoting disciplinary values.

SUBMITTER: Stockwell SB

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4798826 | biostudies-other | 2016 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A Progressive Reading, Writing, and Artistic Module to Support Scientific Literacy.

Stockwell Stephanie B SB

Journal of microbiology & biology education 20160301 1

Scientific literacy, marked by the ability and willingness to engage with scientific information, is supported through a new genre of citizen science-course-based research in association with undergraduate laboratories. A three-phased progressive learning module was developed to enhance student engagement in such contexts while supporting three learning outcomes: I) present an argument based on evidence, II) analyze science and scientists within a social context, and III) experience, reflect upo ...[more]

PMID: 27047600

Similar Datasets

Project description:During the last years, digital writing devices are increasingly replacing handwriting with pencil and paper. As reading and writing skills are central for education, it is important to know, which writing tool is optimal for initial literacy education. The present training study was therefore set up to test the influence of the writing tool on the acquisition of literacy skills at the letter and word level with various tests in a large sample of kindergarten children (n = 147). Using closely matched letter learning games, children were trained with 16 letters by handwriting with a pencil on a sheet of paper, by writing with a stylus on a tablet computer, or by typing letters using a virtual keyboard on a tablet across 7 weeks. Training using a stylus on a touchscreen is an interesting comparison condition for traditional handwriting, because the slippery surface of a touchscreen has lower friction than paper and thus increases difficulty of motor control. Before training, immediately after training and four to five weeks after training, we assessed reading and writing performance using standardized tests. We also assessed visuo-spatial skills before and after training, in order to test, whether the different training regimens affected cognitive domains other than written language. Children of the pencil group showed superior performance in letter recognition and improved visuo-spatial skills compared with keyboard training. The performance of the stylus group did not differ significantly neither from the keyboard nor from the pencil group. Keyboard training, however, resulted in superior performance in word writing and reading compared with handwriting training with a stylus on the tablet, but not compared with the pencil group. Our results suggest that handwriting with pencil fosters acquisition of letter knowledge and improves visuo-spatial skills compared with keyboarding. At least given the current technological state, writing with a stylus on a touchscreen seems to be the least favorable writing tool, possibly because of increased demands on motor control. Future training studies covering a more extended observation period over years are needed to allow conclusions about long-term effects of writing tools on literacy acquisition as well as on general cognitive development.

Project description:PURPOSE:To investigate the effect of reading or writing on a smartphone in terms of intraocular pressure (IOP) changes. DESIGN:Prospective, comparative case series. PARTICIPANTS:Thirty-nine (39) healthy young (age < 40) volunteers. METHODS:The participants were requested to conduct standardized work (i.e., read a sample text on single mobile device and subsequently type it on the same device) under daylight [300 lux] and low-light [100 lux] conditions independently on consecutive days. On each day, three sets of IOP measurements (total: 7) using a rebound tonometer (iCare PRO; Tiolat, Helsinki, Finland) were performed: (1) pre-work (baseline) [2 measurements], (2) during smartphone work [5, 15, and 25 minutes], and (3) post-work [5 and 15 minutes]. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:Changes in IOP at different check-out points. RESULTS:Under the daylight condition, the mean baseline IOP was 13.7 ± 1.8 mmHg, and the mean IOP increased after 5 minutes of work (14.1 ± 1.8 mmHg; +2.0 ± 1.9%; P < 0.001). When the smartphone work lasted for 15 minutes, the IOP showed a further significant increase (15.5 ± 1.7 mmHg; +12.9 ± 4.4%; P < 0.001), which persisted over the course of the 25 minutes of smartphone work (15.3 ± 1.8 mmHg; +11.1 ± 3.9%; P < 0.001); then, after stopping work for 5 minutes, the IOP was restored (13.9 ± 1.7 mmHg; +0.9 ± 2.1%; P = 0.220). Under the low-light condition, the mean IOP was significantly increased immediately after 5 minutes of smartphone work (from 13.9 ± 1.9 to 15.6 ± 1.8 mmHg; +12.1 ± 4.8%; P < 0.001); this IOP increase continued: 17.3 ± 1.9 [+24.7 ± 10.3%] at 15 minutes' work, and 17.0 ± 1.7 mmHg [+23.1 ± 9.5%] at 25 minutes' work (P < 0.001 at both check-out points). Five minutes after stopping the smartphone work, interestingly, the IOP significantly dropped, to a level even lower than that of the pre-work (12.8 ± 1.9 mmHg; -8.1 ± 3.0%; P < 0.001), and at post-work 15 minutes, the IOP returned to the baseline (13.9 ± 1.8 mmHg; -0.3 ± 2.6%; P = 0.360). CONCLUSIONS:In healthy young subjects, reading or writing on smartphone significantly increased IOP, and the changes of IOP were faster and greater under the low-light condition. Smartphone users who are concerned about IOP fluctuation are advised to (1) take a break if they read or write on smartphone for more than 5 minutes, and (2) avoid using smartphones wherever possible in dark places.

Dataset Information

A Progressive Reading, Writing, and Artistic Module to Support Scientific Literacy.

Publications

A Progressive Reading, Writing, and Artistic Module to Support Scientific Literacy.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure