Undergraduate Performance in Solving Ill-Defined Biochemistry Problems.

With growing interest in promoting skills related to the scientific process, we studied performance in solving ill-defined problems demonstrated by graduating biochemistry majors at a public, minority-serving university. As adoption of techniques for facilitating the attainment of higher-order learning objectives broadens, so too does the need to appropriately measure and understand student performance. We extended previous validation of the Individual Problem Solving Assessment (IPSA) and administered multiple versions of the IPSA across two semesters of biochemistry courses. A final version was taken by majors just before program exit, and student responses on that version were analyzed both quantitatively and qualitatively. This mixed-methods study quantifies student performance in scientific problem solving, while probing the qualitative nature of unsatisfactory solutions. Of the five domains measured by the IPSA, we found that average graduates were only successful in two areas: evaluating given experimental data to state results and reflecting on performance after the solution to the problem was provided. The primary difficulties in each domain were quite different. The most widespread challenge for students was to design an investigation that rationally aligned with a given hypothesis. We also extend the findings into pedagogical recommendations.

Stimulation of Critically Ill Patients: Relationship to Sedation.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the number and type of stimulation events and the relationship of stimulation to sedation level in patients receiving mechanical ventilation. METHODS: A 4-hour direct observation was conducted in 103 patients receiving mechanical ventilation. Stimulation events and sedation level before and after the stimulation were documented. Eight categories of stimulation events were developed in a previous pilot study of 36 patients receiving mechanical ventilation. Sedation was measured continuously by using a processed electroencephalographic score (patient state index [PSI]) and intermittently by using the Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale. RESULTS: Patients were mostly alert/mildly sedated (54.4%) at study enrollment. During the 349 hours of observation, 58.8% of the time included stimulation events. General auditory types of stimulation were most common (41.2% of observed time), followed by respiratory management and tactile family stimulation. For all events, auditory-talking, tactile-general, tactile-noxious, and tactile-highly noxious stimuli were associated with higher PSIs (all P < .001) after stimulation; other stimuli were not. Level of consciousness influenced response to stimuli, with almost all types of stimuli increasing PSI for patients more deeply sedated (PSI < 60) just before the stimuli. However, the effect of stimulation on PSI for more alert patients (PSI > 60) was small and variable. DISCUSSION: Critically ill patients receiving mechanical ventilation are subjected to various forms of auditory and tactile stimulation frequently throughout the day. All types of stimuli increased arousal in patients who were more deeply sedated. The effect of stimulation in patients who were not deeply sedated was minimal and inconsistent.

Gauging the gaps in student problem-solving skills: assessment of individual and group use of problem-solving strategies using online discussions.

For the past 3 yr, faculty at the University of New Mexico, Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology have been using interactive online Problem-Based Learning (PBL) case discussions in our large-enrollment classes. We have developed an illustrative tracking method to monitor student use of problem-solving strategies to provide targeted help to groups and to individual students. This method of assessing performance has a high interrater reliability, and senior students, with training, can serve as reliable graders. We have been able to measure improvements in many students' problem-solving strategies, but, not unexpectedly, there is a population of students who consistently apply the same failing strategy when there is no faculty intervention. This new methodology provides an effective tool to direct faculty to constructively intercede in this area of student development.

Comparison of student performance in cooperative learning and traditional lecture-based biochemistry classes.

Student performance in two different introductory biochemistry curricula are compared based on standardized testing of student content knowledge, problem-solving skills, and student opinions about the courses. One curriculum was used in four traditional, lecture-based classes (n = 381 students), whereas the second curriculum was used in two cooperative learning classes (n = 39 students). Students in the cooperative learning classes not only performed at a level above their peers in standardized testing of content knowledge and in critical thinking and problem-solving tasks (p < 0.05), but they also were more positive about their learning experience. The testing data are in contrast to much of the medical school literature on the performance of students in problem-based learning (PBL) curricula, which shows little effect of the curricular format on student exam scores. The reason for the improvement is undoubtedly multifactorial. We argue that the enhancement of student performance in this study is related to: 1) the use of peer educational assistants, 2) an authentic PBL format, and 3) the application of a multicontextual learning environment in the curricular design. Though educationally successful, the cooperative learning classes as described in this study were too resource intensive to continue; however, we are exploring incorporation of some of the "high context" aspects of the small-group interactions into our current lecture-based course with the addition of on-line PBL cases.

Teachers as learners in a cooperative learning biochemistry class.

Upper level college students majoring in biochemistry at the University of New Mexico have the opportunity to participate in an advanced biochemistry course entitled "Biochemistry Education." This course introduces theories of teaching and learning, provides opportunities for participation in course organization, design, and assessment strategies, and requires practice in lecturing, exam writing, and grading. One component of this course required the biochemistry majors to act as educational assistants, leading problem-based learning sessions in a cooperative learning introductory survey biochemistry course for nonmajors. Problem-based learning scenarios used in this course were based on real-life biochemistry problems. As a result of their participation, the educational assistants increased their understanding of the biochemistry principles, gained an appreciation for the difficulty of the job of a "good teacher," developed new approaches to their own learning, and became more confident speakers. The participating biochemistry faculty were also positively affected by the collaborative approach they were attempting to model for the two sets of students and realized the benefits of truly cooperative team teaching.

Support of a Problem-Based Learning Curriculum by Basic Science Faculty.

Although published reports describe benefits to students of learning in a problem-based, student-centered environment, questions have persisted about the excessive faculty time commitments associated with the implementation of PBL pedagogy. The argument has been put forward that the excessive faculty costs of such a curriculum cannot be justified based upon the potential benefits to students. However, the magnitude of the faculty time commitment to a PBL curriculum to support the aforementioned argument is not clear to us and we suspect that it is also equally unclear to individuals charged with making resource decisions supporting the educational efforts of the institution. Therefore, to evaluate this cost - benefit question, we analyzed the actual basic science faculty time commitment in a hybrid PBL curriculum during the first phase 18 months of undergraduate medical education. The results of this analysis do demonstrate an increase in faculty time commitments but do not support the argument that PBL pedagogy is excessively costly in terms of faculty time. For the year analyzed in this report, basic science faculty members contributed on average of 27.4 hours to the instruction of medical students. The results of the analysis did show significant contributions (57% of instructional time) by the clinical faculty during the initial 18 months of medical school. In addition, the data revealed a four-fold difference between time commitments of the four basic science departments. We conclude that a PBL curriculu m does not place unreasonable demands on the time of basic science faculty. The demands on clinical faculty, in the context of their other commitments, could not be evaluated. Moreover, this type of analysis provides a tool that can be used to make faculty resource allocation decisions fairly.