DEEPENING	
  CONCEPTUAL	
  UNDERSTANDING	
  IN	
  THE	
  HIGH	
  SCHOOL	
  AP	
  BIOLOGY	
  
CLASSROOM	
  USING	
  ENGAGEMENT	
  TOOLS	
  AND	
  TECHNIQUES	
  	
  
	
  
By	
  
Dusti	
  Jean	
  Vincent	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
A	
  THESIS	
  
Submitted	
  to	
  	
  
Michigan	
  State	
  University	
  
in	
  partial	
  fulfillment	
  of	
  the	
  requirements	
  
for	
  the	
  degree	
  of	
  	
  
Physical	
  Science—Interdepartmental—Master	
  of	
  Science	
  
2015	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  

	
  

	
  

ABSTRACT	
  
DEEPENING	
  CONCEPTUAL	
  UNDERSTANDING	
  IN	
  THE	
  HIGH	
  SCHOOL	
  AP	
  BIOLOGY	
  
CLASSROOM	
  USING	
  ENGAGEMENT	
  TOOLS	
  AND	
  TECHNIQUES	
  
	
  
	
  
By	
  
Dusti	
  Jean	
  Vincent	
  
Instructing	
  students	
  within	
  a	
  curriculum	
  framework	
  based	
  on	
  conceptual	
  
understanding	
  requires	
  a	
  shift	
  from	
  a	
  lecture-­‐style,	
  teacher-­‐centered	
  delivery	
  method	
  to	
  
one	
  that	
  is	
  student-­‐centered	
  and	
  inquiry-­‐driven.	
  A	
  challenge	
  with	
  this	
  shift	
  is	
  holding	
  
students	
  accountable	
  to	
  preparing	
  for	
  course	
  materials	
  so	
  that	
  class	
  time	
  can	
  be	
  spent	
  
exploring	
  the	
  content	
  in	
  more	
  depth	
  through	
  class	
  discussions,	
  experiential	
  and	
  laboratory	
  
exercises,	
  and	
  modeling.	
  Three	
  components	
  were	
  implemented	
  in	
  an	
  AP	
  Biology	
  classroom	
  
of	
  39	
  students	
  to	
  increase	
  engagement	
  and	
  accountability.	
  These	
  components	
  were	
  short	
  
readings	
  with	
  corresponding	
  tutorials,	
  formative	
  assessments	
  called	
  ConcepTests,	
  and	
  
reflective	
  writing.	
  Student	
  participation	
  in	
  these	
  components	
  was	
  measured.	
  
	
  

Conceptual	
  understanding	
  of	
  biology	
  was	
  evaluated	
  with	
  a	
  pre-­‐test	
  at	
  the	
  beginning	
  

of	
  the	
  term	
  and	
  measured	
  again	
  with	
  a	
  post-­‐test.	
  A	
  Project-­‐Based	
  Learning	
  (PBL)	
  
assessment	
  was	
  also	
  implemented	
  to	
  further	
  engage	
  students	
  and	
  provide	
  a	
  way	
  for	
  
students	
  to	
  apply	
  their	
  understanding	
  to	
  solving	
  a	
  real-­‐world	
  problem.	
  	
  
	
  

Students	
  demonstrated	
  significant	
  gains	
  in	
  conceptual	
  understanding	
  through	
  the	
  

concept	
  and	
  PBL	
  assessment.	
  Participation	
  in	
  the	
  components	
  ranged	
  from	
  73%	
  to	
  86%,	
  
but	
  it	
  was	
  difficult	
  to	
  show	
  a	
  positive	
  correlation	
  between	
  participation	
  and	
  conceptual	
  
understanding.	
  

	
  

DEDICATION	
  
Gratitude	
  to	
  my	
  children,	
  Minnie	
  and	
  Dashiell,	
  and	
  my	
  husband,	
  Brad	
  for	
  your	
  patience,	
  
support,	
  and	
  understanding.	
  You	
  are	
  the	
  reason	
  I	
  do	
  most	
  things.	
  I	
  love	
  you.	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  

iii	
  

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS	
  
	
  
First	
  and	
  foremost,	
  I	
  must	
  thank	
  Merle	
  Heidemann	
  for	
  her	
  guidance,	
  wisdom,	
  and	
  
patience	
  with	
  me	
  over	
  the	
  years	
  as	
  I	
  complete	
  this	
  program.	
  I	
  have	
  achieved	
  so	
  much	
  
growth	
  as	
  a	
  professional	
  thanks	
  to	
  this	
  rigorous	
  and	
  relevant	
  program	
  that	
  she	
  helped	
  to	
  
design.	
  I	
  also	
  want	
  to	
  recognize	
  Margaret	
  Iding	
  for	
  always	
  answering	
  my	
  questions	
  and	
  the	
  
members	
  of	
  my	
  cohort	
  for	
  their	
  support	
  and	
  feedback.	
  
Completion	
  of	
  this	
  program	
  would	
  not	
  have	
  been	
  possible	
  without	
  the	
  love	
  and	
  
support	
  of	
  my	
  husband,	
  Brad.	
  For	
  the	
  many	
  summers	
  I	
  spent	
  in	
  East	
  Lansing	
  and	
  the	
  many	
  
weekends	
  I	
  spent	
  working	
  on	
  this	
  thesis,	
  he	
  was	
  always	
  accommodating,	
  patient,	
  and	
  
understanding.	
  He	
  provided	
  the	
  encouragement	
  I	
  needed	
  when	
  I	
  wanted	
  to	
  quit.	
  I	
  have	
  
never	
  felt	
  such	
  a	
  sense	
  of	
  accomplishment	
  as	
  I	
  do	
  now.	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  

	
  

iv	
  

TABLE	
  OF	
  CONTENTS	
  
	
  
LIST	
  OF	
  TABLES	
  .........................................................................................................................................	
  vi	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  

	
  

LIST	
  OF	
  FIGURES	
  .....................................................................................................................................	
  vii	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  

	
  

KEY	
  TO	
  SYMBOLS/KEY	
  TO	
  ABBREVIATIONS	
  ............................................................................	
  viii	
  
INTRODUCTION	
  ..........................................................................................................................................	
  1	
  
Rationale	
  and	
  Statement	
  of	
  the	
  Problem	
  ...........................................................................	
  1	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  
Class	
  Descriptions	
  and	
  Demographics	
  ............................................................................	
  10	
  

	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  	
  
	
  

IMPLEMENTATION	
  ................................................................................................................................	
  12	
  
General	
  Considerations	
  ..........................................................................................................	
  12	
  
Discussion	
  and	
  Analysis	
  of	
  Unit	
  Components	
  ..............................................................	
  15	
  
Components	
  of	
  the	
  Unit	
  .........................................................................................................	
  17	
  
	
  	
  	
  	
  
Component	
  1:	
  Mastering	
  Biology	
  ........................................................................	
  17	
  
	
  	
  
Component	
  2:	
  ConcepTests	
  ...................................................................................	
  17	
  
	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  
Component	
  3:	
  Whiteboards	
  as	
  a	
  Formative	
  Assessment	
  .........................	
  18	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  
Component	
  4:	
  Using	
  Socratic	
  Dialogue	
  .............................................................	
  20	
  
	
  
Component	
  5:	
  Project-­‐Based	
  Learning	
  .............................................................	
  20	
  
	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  
Component	
  6:	
  Reflective	
  Writing	
  ........................................................................	
  24	
  
	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  
	
  
RESULTS	
  AND	
  ANALYSIS	
  .....................................................................................................................	
  25	
  
Pre-­‐Test	
  and	
  Post-­‐Test	
  Administration	
  ..........................................................................	
  25	
  
Data	
  Analysis—Combined	
  Pre-­‐test	
  and	
  Post-­‐test	
  Item	
  Analysis	
  .........................	
  25	
  
Data	
  Analysis—Evaluation	
  of	
  Practices	
  ..........................................................................	
  27	
  
Data	
  Analysis—PBL	
  Assessment	
  .......................................................................................	
  28	
  
	
  
DISCUSSION	
  ...............................................................................................................................................	
  30	
  
	
  
FUTURE	
  CONSIDERATIONS	
  ................................................................................................................	
  33	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  
	
  
APPENDICES	
  ..............................................................................................................................................	
  35	
  
APPENDIX	
  A:	
  Unit	
  Activities	
  and	
  Components	
  ............................................................	
  36	
  
APPENDIX	
  B:	
  First	
  Student	
  PBL	
  Research	
  Report	
  Exemplar	
  .................................	
  61	
  
APPENDIX	
  C:	
  Parent	
  Letter	
  and	
  Consent	
  Form	
  ...........................................................	
  67	
  
APPENDIX	
  D:	
  Assessment	
  Tools	
  ........................................................................................	
  70	
  
	
  
REFERENCES	
  .............................................................................................................................................	
  76	
  
	
  
	
  

v	
  

LIST	
  OF	
  TABLES	
  
TABLE	
  1:	
  Unit	
  plan	
  implementation	
  and	
  schedule	
  of	
  activities	
  ..........................................	
  13	
  
	
  
TABLE	
  2:	
  Need	
  to	
  Know	
  list	
  generated	
  as	
  part	
  of	
  the	
  introduction	
  to	
  the	
  PBL	
  unit	
  ..	
  21	
  
The	
  Need	
  to	
  Know	
  list	
  includes	
  concepts	
  and	
  questions	
  that	
  students	
  determined	
  were	
  
necessary	
  to	
  answer	
  the	
  driving	
  question	
  for	
  the	
  PBL	
  assessment.	
  
	
  
TABLE	
  3:	
  Concept	
  Assessment	
  pre-­‐test	
  and	
  post-­‐test	
  scores	
  (n=39)	
  ..............................	
  26	
  
Paired	
  t-­‐test	
  showing	
  statistical	
  significance	
  of	
  gain	
  in	
  post-­‐test	
  scores.	
  
	
  
TABLE	
  4:	
  Engagement	
  tools	
  and	
  percent	
  participation	
  (n=39)	
  ..........................................	
  27	
  
Student	
  participation	
  in	
  the	
  three	
  components	
  implemented	
  in	
  this	
  unit	
  
	
  
TABLE	
  5:	
  PBL	
  Self-­‐Reflection	
  Responses	
  ......................................................................................	
  28	
  
A	
  report	
  of	
  common	
  responses	
  to	
  the	
  self-­‐reflection	
  component	
  of	
  the	
  PBL	
  assessment	
  
	
  
TABLE	
  6:	
  PBL	
  Reflection	
  Responses	
  ...............................................................................................	
  29	
  
A	
  summary	
  of	
  which	
  project	
  claims	
  were	
  identified	
  as	
  most	
  effective	
  	
  
	
  
TABLE	
  7:	
  Reflective	
  Writing	
  Scoring	
  Rubric	
  ...............................................................................	
  48	
  
	
  
TABLE	
  8:	
  PBL	
  Student	
  Project	
  Proposals	
  .....................................................................................	
  51	
  
	
  
TABLE	
  9:	
  Charette	
  Protocol	
  Directions	
  and	
  Timing	
  Guidelines	
  ..........................................	
  54	
  	
  
	
  
TABLE	
  10:	
  Gallery	
  Walk	
  Protocol	
  Directions	
  and	
  Timing	
  Guidelines	
  ..............................	
  54	
  
	
  
TABLE	
  11:	
  Critical	
  Friends	
  Protocol	
  Directions	
  and	
  Timing	
  Guidelines	
  .........................	
  55	
  
	
  
TABLE	
  12:	
  PBL	
  Project	
  Scoring	
  Rubric	
  ..........................................................................................	
  73	
  
Final	
  unit	
  project	
  rubric	
  to	
  score	
  written	
  and	
  media	
  components	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  

	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  

vi	
  

LIST	
  OF	
  FIGURES	
  
	
  
FIGURE	
  1:	
  Whiteboard	
  Assessment	
  samples	
  ..............................................................................	
  19	
  
These	
  whiteboard	
  samples	
  were	
  utilized	
  in	
  the	
  cell	
  structure	
  and	
  function	
  unit.	
  Groups	
  of	
  3-­‐4	
  
students	
  responded	
  to	
  the	
  prompt,	
  “Explain	
  how	
  alveoli	
  increase	
  the	
  surface	
  area	
  available	
  
for	
  gas	
  exchange	
  in	
  the	
  lungs.”	
  
	
  
FIGURE	
  2:	
  Whiteboard	
  Assessment	
  samples	
  ..............................................................................	
  19	
  
These	
  whiteboard	
  samples	
  were	
  utilized	
  in	
  the	
  cellular	
  respiration	
  unit.	
  Groups	
  of	
  3-­‐4	
  
students	
  responded	
  to	
  the	
  prompt,	
  “Diagram	
  the	
  process	
  of	
  cellular	
  respiration.”	
  
	
  
FIGURE	
  3:	
  Sample	
  responses	
  to	
  PBL	
  Project	
  Interest	
  Form	
  .................................................	
  22	
  
Students	
  were	
  placed	
  in	
  groups	
  based	
  on	
  their	
  responses	
  to	
  this	
  form.	
  
	
  
FIGURE	
  4:	
  The	
  Science	
  Writing	
  Heuristic	
  (SWH)	
  Student	
  Template	
  (from	
  Burke	
  et.	
  al.,	
  
2005)	
  ............................................................................................................................................................	
  23	
  
	
  
FIGURE	
  5:	
  PBL	
  Student	
  Assessment	
  Scores	
  (n=39)	
  .................................................................	
  27	
  
This	
  figure	
  displays	
  student	
  percentages	
  on	
  the	
  PBL	
  Assessment	
  
Average	
  score	
  =	
  97%	
  
	
  
FIGURE	
  6:	
  ConcepTest	
  Questions	
  .....................................................................................................	
  38	
  
This	
  figure	
  displays	
  the	
  23	
  PowerPoint	
  slides	
  used	
  to	
  project	
  ConcepTest	
  questions	
  to	
  the	
  class.	
  
	
  
FIGURE	
  7:	
  Concept	
  Post-­‐Assessment	
  Macromolecule	
  Structure	
  Diagrams	
  ...................	
  71	
  
	
  
FIGURE	
  8:	
  Concept	
  Post-­‐Assessment	
  Carbon	
  Cycle	
  Diagram	
  ..............................................	
  72	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  

vii	
  

KEY	
  TO	
  ABBREVIATIONS	
  
	
  
	
  
ACS…………………………………………………………………………………………American	
  Chemical	
  Society	
  
AP…………………………………………………………………………………………………….Advanced	
  Placement	
  
CCSS…………………………………………………………………………………..Common	
  Core	
  State	
  Standards	
  
ELA…….…………………………………………………………………………………………English	
  Language	
  Arts	
  
JiTT…………………………………………………………………………………………………Just	
  in	
  Time	
  Teaching	
  
LO………………………………………………………………………………………………………..Learning	
  Objective	
  
MDE…………………………………………………………………………….Michigan	
  Department	
  of	
  Education	
  
MME………………………………………………………………………………………………...Michigan	
  Merit	
  Exam	
  
NGSS……………………………………………………………………….......Next	
  Generation	
  Science	
  Standards	
  
PBL……………………………………………………………………………………………….Project-­‐Based	
  Learning	
  
PI…………………………………………………………………………………………………………….Peer	
  Instruction	
  
SLC………………………………………………………………………………………….Small	
  Learning	
  Community	
  
SWH…………………………………………………………………………………………Science	
  Writing	
  Heuristic

viii	
  

INTRODUCTION	
  
	
  
Rationale	
  and	
  Statement	
  of	
  Problem	
  

	
  

Advanced	
  Placement	
  (AP)	
  curricula	
  allow	
  students	
  to	
  pursue	
  college-­‐level	
  courses	
  
while	
  still	
  attending	
  high	
  school.	
  AP®	
  courses	
  conclude	
  with	
  an	
  examination	
  that	
  provides	
  
students	
  with	
  college	
  credit	
  or	
  placement	
  in	
  a	
  more	
  advanced	
  course	
  in	
  college.	
  	
  The	
  
College	
  Board	
  claims	
  that	
  performing	
  well	
  on	
  AP®	
  exams	
  is	
  a	
  “gateway	
  to	
  success	
  in	
  
college”	
  (College	
  Board,	
  2012).	
  Although	
  taking	
  challenging	
  courses	
  in	
  high	
  school,	
  such	
  as	
  
AP®	
  prepares	
  students	
  for	
  the	
  rigor	
  of	
  college,	
  it’s	
  only	
  part	
  of	
  the	
  picture.	
  The	
  level	
  of	
  
engagement	
  and	
  participation	
  in	
  AP®	
  courses	
  and	
  general-­‐education	
  courses	
  alike	
  is	
  
strong	
  predictor	
  of	
  college	
  success	
  (NSSE,	
  2006).	
  
In	
  the	
  spring	
  of	
  2012,	
  the	
  College	
  Board	
  launched	
  a	
  revision	
  of	
  its	
  AP	
  Biology	
  
curriculum	
  framework	
  from	
  one	
  of	
  content	
  coverage	
  to	
  a	
  conceptual	
  understanding	
  of	
  
content.	
  The	
  revision’s	
  intent	
  was	
  to	
  move	
  students	
  away	
  from	
  memorizing	
  rote	
  facts	
  to	
  
applying	
  understanding	
  of	
  biology	
  through	
  inquiry-­‐based	
  learning.	
  The	
  new	
  curriculum	
  
framework	
  also	
  aligned	
  to	
  what	
  college	
  instructors	
  agreed	
  were	
  skills	
  and	
  habits	
  of	
  mind	
  
that	
  students	
  should	
  practice	
  in	
  order	
  to	
  be	
  college-­‐ready.	
  These	
  practices	
  include:	
  using	
  
models,	
  applying	
  mathematics,	
  questioning,	
  planning	
  out	
  and	
  implementing	
  data	
  collection	
  
strategies,	
  analyzing	
  and	
  evaluating	
  data,	
  working	
  with	
  scientific	
  explanations	
  and	
  theories,	
  
and	
  connecting	
  knowledge	
  across	
  many	
  areas	
  (College	
  Board,	
  2012).	
  These	
  curriculum	
  
changes	
  follow	
  the	
  development	
  of	
  the	
  Common	
  Core	
  State	
  Standards	
  (CCSS)	
  in	
  2009	
  and	
  
the	
  Next	
  Generation	
  Science	
  Standards	
  (NGSS)	
  in	
  2010,	
  both	
  of	
  which	
  suggest	
  a	
  framework	
  
for	
  learning	
  that	
  emphasizes	
  skills	
  and	
  deep	
  understanding	
  (NGA	
  2010	
  &	
  NRC,	
  2011).	
  Both	
  

1	
  

the	
  NGSS	
  and	
  Common	
  Core	
  were	
  developed	
  with	
  the	
  goal	
  of	
  producing	
  students	
  who	
  are	
  
“career	
  and	
  college-­‐ready”	
  with	
  an	
  emphasis	
  on	
  critical	
  thinking	
  skills.	
  Instructing	
  students	
  
within	
  these	
  frameworks	
  requires	
  a	
  shift	
  from	
  a	
  lecture-­‐style,	
  teacher-­‐centered	
  delivery	
  
method	
  to	
  one	
  that	
  is	
  student-­‐centered	
  and	
  inquiry-­‐driven.	
  One	
  challenge	
  with	
  this	
  shift	
  is	
  
the	
  accelerated	
  nature	
  of	
  the	
  AP	
  Biology	
  curriculum.	
  Lecture-­‐style	
  content	
  delivery,	
  while	
  
time-­‐efficient,	
  generally	
  does	
  not	
  contribute	
  to	
  student	
  understanding,	
  (Mazur,	
  1997).	
  
Another	
  challenge	
  is	
  holding	
  students	
  accountable	
  to	
  preparing	
  for	
  course	
  materials	
  so	
  that	
  
class	
  time	
  can	
  be	
  spent	
  exploring	
  the	
  content	
  in	
  more	
  depth	
  through	
  class	
  discussions,	
  
experiential	
  and	
  laboratory	
  exercises,	
  and	
  modeling.	
  	
  
Because	
  of	
  the	
  student-­‐centered	
  nature	
  of	
  inquiry-­‐based	
  classrooms,	
  student	
  
engagement	
  is	
  essential.	
  Students	
  must	
  be	
  active	
  members	
  of	
  the	
  classroom	
  community.	
  
One	
  way	
  to	
  measure	
  engagement	
  is	
  participation	
  in	
  class	
  activities	
  (Chapman,	
  2003).	
  
Additionally,	
  the	
  quality	
  of	
  student	
  work	
  samples	
  may	
  also	
  document	
  engagement.	
  In	
  order	
  
to	
  target	
  the	
  specific	
  science	
  skills	
  that	
  the	
  College	
  Board	
  identifies	
  as	
  critical	
  to	
  college	
  
success,	
  students	
  must	
  be	
  apprenticed	
  in	
  these	
  skills.	
  Hence,	
  the	
  role	
  of	
  the	
  teacher	
  in	
  an	
  
inquiry-­‐based	
  classroom	
  is	
  one	
  of	
  an	
  expert	
  facilitator	
  to	
  move	
  students	
  from	
  being	
  
“marginal	
  outsiders”	
  to	
  “competent	
  outsiders”	
  (Feinstein,	
  2010).	
  With	
  the	
  help	
  of	
  an	
  expert	
  
in	
  the	
  content	
  area,	
  students	
  learn	
  and	
  practice	
  the	
  skills	
  of	
  a	
  scientist.	
  
Students	
  operating	
  in	
  an	
  inquiry	
  classroom	
  must	
  also	
  be	
  able	
  to	
  achieve	
  depth	
  of	
  
understanding.	
  Depth	
  of	
  understanding	
  comes	
  from	
  questioning	
  current	
  conceptual	
  
understanding	
  (Zirbel,	
  2005)	
  and	
  correcting	
  misconceptions	
  as	
  they	
  arise.	
  Students	
  might	
  
deal	
  with	
  discrepancies	
  between	
  their	
  own	
  understanding	
  and	
  accepted	
  understanding	
  by	
  
using	
  metacognitive	
  tools.	
  Metacognition,	
  or	
  “thinking	
  about	
  your	
  thinking”,	
  means	
  

2	
  

understanding	
  how	
  we	
  learn	
  and	
  make	
  connections	
  between	
  new	
  knowledge	
  and	
  existing	
  
knowledge	
  (Schoenbach,	
  et.al.,	
  2012).	
  Tina	
  Grotzer,	
  the	
  chief	
  investigator	
  for	
  the	
  Harvard	
  
Project	
  Zero	
  educational	
  research	
  group,	
  says	
  that	
  depth	
  can	
  be	
  defined	
  as	
  “how	
  concepts	
  
are	
  represented	
  in	
  a	
  student’s	
  mind	
  and	
  how	
  they	
  are	
  connected	
  to	
  one	
  another”	
  (Grotzer	
  
and	
  Bell,	
  1999).	
  Expecting	
  students	
  to	
  make	
  these	
  connections	
  without	
  support	
  is	
  
unreasonable.	
  In	
  an	
  inquiry-­‐based	
  classroom,	
  students	
  are	
  exploring	
  problems	
  and	
  asking	
  
questions	
  about	
  their	
  learning.	
  The	
  social	
  interaction	
  among	
  students	
  and	
  between	
  
students	
  and	
  teacher	
  around	
  content	
  can	
  shape	
  ideas	
  (Feinstein,	
  2010).	
  Creating	
  a	
  
classroom	
  environment	
  that	
  values	
  such	
  interaction	
  supports	
  students	
  willing	
  to	
  ask	
  
questions	
  and/or	
  identify	
  when	
  they	
  need	
  help	
  (Schoenbach,	
  et.al.,	
  2012).	
  Discussion,	
  
paired	
  with	
  metacognitive	
  tools	
  and	
  reflection,	
  can	
  provide	
  the	
  means	
  for	
  students	
  to	
  make	
  
strong	
  connections	
  and	
  achieve	
  deep	
  understanding.	
  
Whereas	
  achieving	
  the	
  depth	
  of	
  understanding	
  required	
  under	
  the	
  new	
  AP	
  Biology	
  
framework	
  is	
  one	
  challenge,	
  the	
  other	
  is	
  time.	
  The	
  AP	
  Biology	
  course	
  is	
  the	
  equivalent	
  of	
  
two	
  college	
  semesters	
  of	
  introductory	
  biology	
  (College	
  Board,	
  2012).	
  However,	
  in	
  a	
  college	
  
biology	
  course,	
  a	
  typical	
  schedule	
  is	
  a	
  one-­‐hour	
  lecture	
  2	
  or	
  3	
  times	
  per	
  week	
  and	
  a	
  
laboratory	
  session	
  that	
  may	
  be	
  3	
  or	
  4	
  hours	
  long.	
  In	
  a	
  high	
  school	
  AP	
  Biology	
  course,	
  
laboratory	
  work	
  and	
  content	
  generally	
  must	
  be	
  delivered	
  in	
  a	
  one-­‐hour	
  period.	
  The	
  
inquiry-­‐based	
  approach	
  to	
  the	
  AP	
  Biology	
  labs	
  also	
  requires	
  more	
  time	
  as	
  students	
  are	
  
designing	
  their	
  own	
  procedures	
  and	
  getting	
  approval	
  and	
  oversight	
  from	
  their	
  instructor.	
  A	
  
popular	
  movement	
  in	
  AP	
  courses	
  is	
  the	
  “flipped”	
  approach	
  to	
  teaching.	
  The	
  flipped	
  
classroom	
  takes	
  direct	
  instruction	
  out	
  of	
  the	
  classroom	
  and	
  puts	
  it	
  in	
  the	
  hands	
  of	
  the	
  
student.	
  The	
  expectation	
  is	
  that	
  students	
  prepare	
  on	
  their	
  own	
  by	
  watching	
  an	
  online	
  

3	
  

lecture	
  or	
  video	
  and/or	
  reading	
  an	
  assignment	
  prior	
  to	
  coming	
  to	
  class.	
  Class	
  time	
  is	
  then	
  
spent	
  on	
  discussion	
  of	
  the	
  content	
  students	
  were	
  asked	
  to	
  preview	
  and	
  application	
  of	
  the	
  
material	
  that	
  was	
  learned	
  outside	
  of	
  the	
  classroom.	
  Eric	
  Mazur	
  of	
  Harvard	
  University	
  
pioneered	
  this	
  approach	
  with	
  his	
  introductory	
  physics	
  classes	
  using	
  procedures	
  he	
  calls	
  
Peer	
  Instruction	
  (PI)	
  and	
  Just	
  in	
  Time	
  Teaching	
  (JiTT).	
  Peer	
  Instruction	
  is	
  teaching	
  that	
  
promotes	
  interaction	
  between	
  students	
  (Mazur,	
  2009).	
  Students	
  learn	
  from	
  one	
  another	
  by	
  
discussing	
  difficult	
  concepts	
  and	
  ideas	
  that	
  challenge	
  their	
  current	
  understanding.	
  This	
  
process	
  complements	
  the	
  social	
  environment	
  of	
  the	
  classroom	
  and	
  values	
  discussion	
  
described	
  earlier.	
  Just	
  in	
  Time	
  Teaching,	
  as	
  the	
  name	
  suggests,	
  is	
  delivering	
  content	
  and	
  
providing	
  explanation	
  as	
  students	
  need	
  it,	
  very	
  soon	
  after	
  students	
  preview	
  the	
  material	
  on	
  
their	
  own.	
  	
  
In	
  Mazur’s	
  class,	
  students	
  read	
  an	
  assignment	
  prior	
  to	
  coming	
  to	
  class	
  and	
  provided	
  
feedback	
  to	
  the	
  instructor	
  about	
  how	
  well	
  they	
  understood	
  the	
  information.	
  Then	
  during	
  
class	
  time,	
  usually	
  the	
  next	
  day,	
  students	
  answered	
  questions	
  called	
  ConcepTests	
  that	
  
addressed	
  the	
  content	
  students	
  were	
  expected	
  to	
  preview	
  independently.	
  ConcepTests	
  are	
  
high	
  quality	
  and	
  high-­‐level	
  thinking	
  questions	
  that	
  are	
  designed	
  to	
  be	
  challenging,	
  yet	
  
reasonable	
  (Mazur	
  and	
  Watkins,	
  2009).	
  The	
  format	
  for	
  ConcepTests	
  involved	
  first	
  posing	
  
the	
  question	
  to	
  the	
  class.	
  Students	
  were	
  expected	
  to	
  think	
  about	
  the	
  question	
  individually	
  
and	
  silently,	
  then	
  answer,	
  usually	
  with	
  clickers.	
  Next,	
  students	
  turned	
  to	
  their	
  neighbor	
  and	
  
engaged	
  in	
  a	
  discussion	
  of	
  their	
  thinking	
  about	
  the	
  problem	
  (also	
  called	
  Think-­‐Pair-­‐Share).	
  
Students	
  then	
  had	
  the	
  opportunity	
  to	
  revise	
  their	
  answers	
  and	
  the	
  students	
  were	
  polled	
  
again.	
  If	
  a	
  large	
  number	
  of	
  students	
  provided	
  an	
  incorrect	
  answer,	
  then	
  the	
  instructor	
  
intervened	
  with	
  some	
  explanation.	
  Otherwise,	
  the	
  instructor	
  proceeded	
  to	
  another	
  

4	
  

ConcepTest	
  question.	
  Dr.	
  Mazur	
  observed	
  a	
  strong	
  correlation	
  between	
  student	
  confidence	
  
in	
  the	
  concepts	
  addressed	
  through	
  the	
  ConcepTests	
  and	
  correctness	
  (Mazur,	
  1997).	
  
Through	
  PI	
  and	
  JITT,	
  Dr.	
  Mazur	
  demonstrated	
  that	
  conceptual	
  understanding	
  of	
  physics	
  
was	
  vastly	
  improved	
  over	
  traditional	
  lecture-­‐style	
  teaching	
  and	
  gender	
  gaps	
  were	
  
diminished	
  using	
  this	
  instructional	
  method	
  (Mazur	
  and	
  Watkins,	
  2009).	
  Michelle	
  Smith	
  and	
  
her	
  colleagues	
  from	
  the	
  University	
  of	
  Colorado	
  at	
  Boulder	
  confirmed	
  Dr.	
  Mazur’s	
  findings	
  in	
  
an	
  introductory	
  genetics	
  course.	
  They	
  found	
  that	
  the	
  combination	
  of	
  peer	
  discussion	
  and	
  
explanation	
  by	
  the	
  instructor	
  increased	
  performance	
  in	
  the	
  course	
  (as	
  measured	
  by	
  exams,	
  
homework,	
  and	
  participation)	
  than	
  either	
  method	
  used	
  alone	
  (Smith,	
  et.al.,	
  2011).	
  The	
  
flipped	
  model	
  allows	
  more	
  classroom	
  time	
  to	
  be	
  spent	
  on	
  addressing	
  concepts	
  and	
  
application,	
  therefore	
  targeting	
  what	
  students	
  need	
  to	
  learn	
  the	
  most.	
  The	
  flipped	
  model	
  as	
  
Dr.	
  Mazur	
  applied	
  it	
  also	
  engaged	
  students	
  with	
  the	
  ConcepTests	
  and	
  Peer	
  Instruction.	
  
Students	
  enjoy	
  the	
  game-­‐like	
  nature	
  of	
  ConcepTests,	
  especially	
  when	
  using	
  technology	
  such	
  
as	
  clickers	
  or	
  smart	
  phones	
  to	
  collect	
  answers.	
  The	
  use	
  of	
  discussion	
  and	
  metacognitive	
  
thinking	
  also	
  allowed	
  for	
  connections	
  to	
  be	
  made	
  and	
  therefore	
  deeper	
  understanding.	
  
Catherine	
  Crouch	
  and	
  Eric	
  Mazur	
  reported	
  at	
  the	
  end	
  of	
  a	
  10-­‐year	
  study	
  of	
  PI	
  and	
  JiTT	
  that	
  
“complex	
  reasoning	
  develops	
  better	
  with	
  cooperative	
  learning	
  and	
  engagement	
  with	
  
material”	
  (Crouch	
  and	
  Mazur,	
  2001).	
  Not	
  only	
  did	
  students	
  talk	
  to	
  one	
  another	
  about	
  their	
  
understanding	
  with	
  PI,	
  but	
  students	
  also	
  used	
  evidence	
  to	
  support	
  their	
  thinking,	
  a	
  skill	
  
that	
  is	
  emphasized	
  in	
  CCSS,	
  NGSS,	
  and	
  AP	
  Biology.	
  
Whiteboards	
  are	
  an	
  effective	
  and	
  cost-­‐efficient	
  tool	
  to	
  document	
  the	
  conversations	
  
and	
  the	
  thinking	
  that	
  takes	
  place	
  during	
  students’	
  discussions.	
  The	
  use	
  of	
  whiteboards	
  in	
  
the	
  classroom	
  also	
  provided	
  a	
  means	
  for	
  students	
  to	
  engage	
  in	
  the	
  content	
  because	
  it	
  

5	
  

involves	
  a	
  public	
  presentation	
  of	
  knowledge	
  and	
  further	
  allows	
  students	
  to	
  interact	
  
socially.	
  In	
  cooperative	
  groups,	
  students	
  discussed	
  a	
  problem	
  and	
  developed	
  a	
  common	
  
understanding	
  through	
  clarification	
  with	
  one	
  another.	
  When	
  students	
  presented	
  their	
  
whiteboards	
  to	
  other	
  groups,	
  they	
  developed	
  deeper	
  understanding	
  as	
  their	
  peers	
  asked	
  
additional	
  questions	
  and	
  got	
  clarification.	
  By	
  training	
  students	
  with	
  Socratic	
  questioning	
  
and	
  dialogue	
  techniques,	
  students	
  probed	
  one	
  another	
  for	
  deeper	
  understanding	
  and	
  
targeted	
  metacognitive	
  thinking	
  (Paul	
  and	
  Binker,	
  2012).	
  Cooperative	
  groups	
  must	
  be	
  able	
  
to	
  explain	
  and	
  justify	
  their	
  explanations	
  with	
  evidence.	
  In	
  a	
  sense,	
  the	
  use	
  of	
  whiteboards	
  is	
  
formalizing	
  PI.	
  For	
  the	
  instructor,	
  students	
  writing	
  explanations	
  and	
  thinking	
  on	
  
whiteboards	
  allows	
  him/her	
  to	
  identify	
  how	
  new,	
  factual	
  information	
  is	
  connecting	
  with	
  
students’	
  existing	
  conceptual	
  framework	
  (Wenning,	
  2005).	
  Whiteboards	
  may	
  also	
  be	
  used	
  
as	
  a	
  formative	
  assessment	
  tool	
  and	
  to	
  check	
  students’	
  understanding	
  of	
  a	
  concept.	
  
The	
  key	
  strategies	
  most	
  closely	
  related	
  to	
  college	
  success	
  are	
  intellectual	
  openness	
  
and	
  inquisitiveness,	
  analysis,	
  argumentation,	
  problem	
  solving,	
  writing,	
  and	
  research	
  
(Conley,	
  2007b).	
  In	
  order	
  for	
  students	
  to	
  develop	
  these	
  habits,	
  they	
  need	
  to	
  practice	
  them	
  
repeatedly	
  and	
  in	
  many	
  contexts.	
  Project-­‐based	
  learning	
  (PBL)	
  is	
  one	
  approach	
  to	
  
addressing	
  these	
  skills.	
  In	
  PBL,	
  a	
  unit	
  of	
  study	
  is	
  introduced	
  with	
  an	
  engaging	
  activity	
  
framed	
  by	
  a	
  driving	
  question	
  intended	
  to	
  inspire	
  and	
  motivate	
  students	
  to	
  learn	
  due	
  to	
  its	
  
relevancy	
  and	
  high	
  interest	
  (Larner	
  and	
  Mergendoller,	
  2010).	
  Students	
  work	
  to	
  solve	
  the	
  
problem	
  through	
  research,	
  data	
  collection,	
  development	
  of	
  models,	
  and	
  writing.	
  In	
  addition	
  
to	
  addressing	
  the	
  academic	
  skills	
  of	
  problem	
  solving,	
  research,	
  and	
  writing,	
  students	
  
collaborate	
  with	
  one	
  another	
  and	
  present	
  their	
  work	
  to	
  their	
  peers	
  and	
  potentially	
  to	
  a	
  
public	
  audience,	
  which	
  are	
  additional	
  21st	
  century	
  skills	
  that	
  college	
  professors	
  agree	
  are	
  

6	
  

important	
  for	
  success	
  in	
  college	
  and	
  beyond	
  (Conley,	
  2007a).	
  Consistent	
  with	
  an	
  inquiry-­‐
based	
  teaching	
  model,	
  PBL	
  is	
  a	
  very	
  student-­‐centered	
  teaching	
  methodology	
  in	
  which	
  
teachers	
  provide	
  support	
  for	
  students	
  through	
  teaching	
  the	
  necessary	
  content	
  and	
  skills	
  
students	
  need	
  to	
  successfully	
  address	
  the	
  problem	
  they	
  are	
  researching.	
  In	
  this	
  way,	
  
learning	
  is	
  contextualized	
  and	
  is	
  part	
  of	
  a	
  relevant,	
  meaningful	
  task	
  (Hmelo-­‐Silver,	
  2004).	
  
The	
  teacher	
  models	
  effective	
  thinking	
  and	
  learning	
  strategies	
  and	
  coaches	
  his/her	
  students	
  
in	
  the	
  application	
  of	
  those	
  strategies.	
  Through	
  metacognitive	
  routines	
  and	
  questioning,	
  
students	
  come	
  to	
  explain	
  the	
  problem	
  they	
  are	
  investigating	
  by	
  focusing	
  on	
  evidence.	
  Just	
  
as	
  in	
  PI	
  and	
  JiTT,	
  student	
  collaboration	
  is	
  essential,	
  as	
  students	
  rely	
  on	
  each	
  other	
  as	
  
contributors	
  to	
  a	
  body	
  of	
  knowledge	
  in	
  solving	
  a	
  problem.	
  As	
  students	
  work	
  through	
  a	
  
challenging	
  problem,	
  students	
  pause	
  and	
  reflect	
  on	
  their	
  progress,	
  further	
  developing	
  
strong	
  learning	
  connections	
  and	
  schema.	
  Reflection	
  is	
  an	
  opportunity	
  for	
  the	
  teacher	
  to	
  
provide	
  feedback	
  to	
  students	
  on	
  their	
  progress.	
  
In	
  a	
  medical	
  school	
  setting	
  that	
  used	
  PBL	
  to	
  train	
  future	
  physicians,	
  data	
  showed	
  
that	
  students	
  were	
  more	
  likely	
  to	
  use	
  evidence-­‐based	
  reasoning	
  to	
  provide	
  explanations	
  of	
  
medical	
  problems	
  than	
  students	
  who	
  were	
  trained	
  in	
  more	
  traditional	
  programs	
  that	
  relied	
  
solely	
  on	
  data	
  (Hmelo-­‐Silver,	
  2004).	
  Another	
  study	
  conducted	
  at	
  a	
  technological	
  school	
  in	
  
Israel	
  found	
  that	
  students	
  trained	
  in	
  a	
  PBL	
  showed	
  a	
  post-­‐test	
  increase	
  of	
  84%	
  on	
  a	
  
standardized	
  assessment	
  as	
  compared	
  to	
  a	
  52%	
  increase	
  seen	
  in	
  the	
  control	
  group	
  
(Mioduser	
  and	
  Betzer,	
  2007).	
  Although	
  published	
  studies	
  investigating	
  the	
  use	
  of	
  PBL	
  in	
  
secondary	
  classrooms	
  are	
  lacking,	
  the	
  engagement	
  students	
  demonstrate	
  with	
  their	
  
learning	
  process	
  and	
  the	
  high-­‐level	
  thinking	
  skills	
  employed	
  by	
  using	
  PBL	
  make	
  it	
  a	
  
worthwhile	
  technique	
  to	
  try	
  in	
  an	
  inquiry-­‐based	
  classroom.	
  

7	
  

All	
  of	
  the	
  aforementioned	
  frameworks	
  and	
  techniques	
  were	
  designed	
  to	
  address	
  and	
  
deepen	
  students’	
  conceptual	
  understanding.	
  The	
  final	
  piece	
  of	
  this	
  problem	
  is	
  assessing	
  
conceptual	
  understanding.	
  Dennie	
  Wolf	
  and	
  other	
  collaborators	
  from	
  Project	
  Zero	
  at	
  
Harvard	
  University	
  inform	
  us	
  to	
  “assess	
  thinking	
  over	
  the	
  possession	
  of	
  information”	
  (Wolf,	
  
et.	
  al.,	
  1991).	
  This	
  could	
  be	
  done	
  through	
  performance	
  tasks,	
  longitudinal	
  studies	
  tracking	
  
student	
  progress,	
  and	
  reading	
  and	
  writing	
  with	
  authentic	
  tasks.	
  Another	
  important	
  piece	
  of	
  
assessing	
  conceptual	
  understanding	
  is	
  the	
  social	
  experience	
  of	
  explaining	
  understanding	
  to	
  
others,	
  which	
  corroborates	
  the	
  work	
  of	
  Eric	
  Mazur,	
  Esther	
  Zirbel,	
  and	
  others	
  mentioned	
  
throughout	
  this	
  introduction.	
  Wolf	
  makes	
  the	
  case	
  that	
  theses	
  defenses	
  and	
  the	
  scientific	
  
review	
  process	
  is	
  akin	
  to	
  the	
  kind	
  of	
  assessment	
  we	
  might	
  ask	
  of	
  students	
  to	
  demonstrate	
  
deeper	
  conceptual	
  understanding.	
  Although	
  this	
  is	
  best	
  practiced	
  in	
  teaching,	
  the	
  climate	
  of	
  
standardized	
  testing	
  and	
  teacher	
  evaluation	
  from	
  state	
  lawmakers	
  runs	
  contrary	
  to	
  what	
  
teachers	
  and	
  educational	
  researchers	
  know	
  is	
  more	
  authentic	
  learning.	
  
The	
  presentation	
  of	
  a	
  research	
  project	
  at	
  the	
  end	
  of	
  a	
  unit	
  of	
  study	
  is	
  certainly	
  a	
  
performance	
  task	
  that	
  accurately	
  measures	
  conceptual	
  understanding.	
  Assessing	
  
conceptual	
  understanding	
  targets	
  development	
  of	
  the	
  essential	
  skills	
  students	
  need	
  to	
  be	
  
college-­‐ready	
  and	
  also	
  provides	
  practice	
  in	
  reading	
  and	
  writing	
  (Wolf	
  et.	
  al.,	
  1991).	
  The	
  
Common	
  Core	
  College	
  and	
  Career	
  Readiness	
  Anchor	
  Standards	
  in	
  Writing	
  state	
  that,	
  
“students	
  need	
  to	
  learn	
  to	
  use	
  writing	
  as	
  a	
  way	
  of	
  offering	
  and	
  supporting	
  opinions,	
  
demonstrating	
  understanding	
  of	
  the	
  subjects	
  they	
  are	
  studying,	
  and	
  conveying	
  real	
  and	
  
imagined	
  experiences	
  and	
  events	
  (CCSSI,	
  2015).	
  Regardless	
  of	
  the	
  content,	
  students	
  must	
  
become	
  competent	
  at	
  gathering	
  information,	
  evaluating	
  sources	
  for	
  accuracy	
  and	
  
credibility,	
  and	
  citing	
  sources	
  appropriately.	
  In	
  the	
  digital	
  age,	
  students	
  often	
  don’t	
  

8	
  

consider	
  the	
  quality	
  of	
  what	
  they	
  read	
  online	
  and	
  that	
  published	
  material,	
  even	
  if	
  it	
  is	
  in	
  a	
  
digital	
  format,	
  is	
  intellectual	
  property	
  and	
  therefore	
  must	
  be	
  cited.	
  In	
  other	
  words,	
  research	
  
skills	
  must	
  be	
  taught	
  in	
  a	
  variety	
  of	
  contexts	
  and	
  often	
  enough	
  so	
  that	
  students	
  develop	
  the	
  
adeptness	
  that	
  comes	
  with	
  being	
  “college	
  ready”.	
  The	
  challenge	
  that	
  non-­‐English	
  Language	
  
Arts	
  (ELA)	
  teachers	
  often	
  cite	
  with	
  requiring	
  students	
  to	
  write	
  in	
  content-­‐area	
  classrooms	
  
is	
  assessing	
  it.	
  One	
  might	
  argue,	
  however,	
  that	
  a	
  content-­‐area	
  teacher	
  knows	
  what	
  writing	
  
should	
  look	
  like	
  in	
  his/her	
  content	
  area	
  and	
  can	
  provide	
  appropriate	
  feedback	
  to	
  his/her	
  
students.	
  Peter	
  Elbow,	
  English	
  professor	
  at	
  the	
  University	
  of	
  Massachusetts	
  Amherst,	
  
would	
  suggest	
  that	
  when	
  teachers	
  assess	
  writing,	
  we	
  should	
  focus	
  on	
  evaluating	
  rather	
  
than	
  judging	
  or	
  ranking	
  writing.	
  As	
  teachers,	
  we	
  can	
  provide	
  feedback	
  to	
  students	
  on	
  the	
  
strengths	
  and	
  weaknesses	
  of	
  their	
  writing	
  and	
  their	
  ability	
  to	
  follow	
  the	
  criteria	
  as	
  
provided	
  in	
  a	
  rubric	
  or	
  assignment	
  (Elbow,	
  1993).	
  Effectively,	
  we	
  are	
  using	
  writing	
  as	
  a	
  
learning	
  tool,	
  to	
  help	
  students	
  deepen	
  their	
  understanding	
  and	
  make	
  connections.	
  In	
  an	
  
inquiry	
  classroom	
  where	
  student	
  questions	
  are	
  valued	
  and	
  explored,	
  the	
  Science	
  Writing	
  
Heuristic	
  (SWH)	
  is	
  a	
  framework	
  that	
  blends	
  guided	
  inquiry	
  with	
  writing-­‐to-­‐learn	
  strategies	
  
(Burke,	
  et.	
  al.,	
  2005).	
  The	
  SWH	
  replaces	
  the	
  traditional	
  lab	
  report	
  by	
  putting	
  the	
  questions	
  
students	
  are	
  asking	
  about	
  a	
  phenomenon	
  or	
  event	
  at	
  the	
  forefront	
  and	
  guiding	
  students	
  
through	
  a	
  logical	
  thinking	
  process.	
  In	
  following	
  the	
  SWH,	
  students	
  make	
  claims	
  and	
  support	
  
them	
  with	
  evidence,	
  both	
  from	
  their	
  own	
  experimentation	
  and	
  published	
  sources.	
  In	
  using	
  
the	
  SWH,	
  students	
  connect	
  valuable	
  research	
  skills	
  with	
  their	
  writing.	
  The	
  SWH	
  also	
  
parallels	
  the	
  framework	
  teachers	
  employ	
  in	
  a	
  PBL	
  classroom	
  by	
  first	
  identifying	
  questions,	
  
then	
  following	
  those	
  questions	
  with	
  tests	
  and	
  gathering	
  evidence.	
  The	
  part	
  of	
  the	
  SWH	
  that	
  
a	
  traditional	
  lab	
  report	
  lacks	
  is	
  a	
  reflective	
  piece	
  where	
  students	
  explore	
  the	
  question,	
  

9	
  

“How	
  do	
  my	
  ideas	
  compare	
  with	
  other	
  ideas?”	
  In	
  this	
  section	
  of	
  the	
  SWH,	
  students	
  not	
  only	
  
evaluate	
  evidence	
  from	
  published	
  works,	
  but	
  that	
  of	
  their	
  peers	
  as	
  well.	
  This	
  models	
  a	
  
scientific	
  review	
  process	
  where	
  students	
  read	
  and	
  respond	
  to	
  each	
  other’s	
  work	
  in	
  an	
  effort	
  
to	
  gain	
  deeper	
  understanding.	
  This	
  process	
  also	
  has	
  a	
  social	
  component,	
  which	
  engages	
  the	
  
students	
  and	
  develops	
  their	
  presentation	
  skills.	
  K.A.	
  Burke	
  and	
  others	
  have	
  observed	
  
significant	
  gains	
  on	
  the	
  American	
  Chemistry	
  Society	
  (ACS)	
  exam	
  among	
  college	
  freshmen	
  in	
  
an	
  introductory	
  chemistry	
  course	
  at	
  Iowa	
  State	
  University	
  who	
  were	
  instructed	
  with	
  the	
  
SWH	
  (Burke,	
  2005).	
  	
  	
  	
  
	
  
Class	
  Descriptions	
  and	
  Demographics	
  
Students	
  in	
  AP	
  Biology	
  at	
  Skyline	
  High	
  School	
  in	
  Ann	
  Arbor,	
  Michigan	
  participated	
  in	
  
this	
  study	
  to	
  observe	
  how	
  various	
  engagement	
  tools	
  impacted	
  their	
  understanding	
  of	
  
biology	
  concepts.	
  Ann	
  Arbor	
  is	
  a	
  city	
  with	
  over	
  115,000	
  residents	
  that	
  lies	
  36	
  miles	
  west	
  of	
  
Detroit.	
  Ann	
  Arbor	
  is	
  home	
  to	
  the	
  University	
  of	
  Michigan,	
  a	
  world-­‐renown	
  science	
  and	
  
medical	
  research	
  institution.	
  The	
  university	
  is	
  the	
  main	
  basis	
  of	
  the	
  city’s	
  economy,	
  
population,	
  and	
  cultural	
  awareness.	
  Skyline	
  High	
  School	
  opened	
  in	
  the	
  fall	
  of	
  2008	
  as	
  the	
  
city’s	
  third	
  comprehensive	
  high	
  school	
  to	
  relieve	
  overcrowding	
  at	
  the	
  other	
  two	
  high	
  
schools.	
  The	
  school	
  was	
  designed	
  with	
  a	
  focus	
  on	
  21st	
  century	
  skills,	
  mastery	
  learning,	
  and	
  
small	
  learning	
  communities	
  (SLC’s).	
  SLC’s	
  were	
  implemented	
  as	
  a	
  way	
  to	
  make	
  the	
  school’s	
  
population	
  of	
  approximately	
  1500	
  students	
  feel	
  smaller	
  and	
  provide	
  opportunities	
  for	
  
students	
  and	
  teachers	
  to	
  form	
  strong	
  relationships	
  with	
  one	
  another.	
  Most	
  of	
  the	
  students	
  
who	
  attend	
  Skyline	
  live	
  within	
  the	
  school	
  boundary,	
  but	
  every	
  year	
  approximately	
  300	
  
open-­‐enrollment	
  spaces	
  are	
  available	
  for	
  students	
  who	
  live	
  outside	
  of	
  the	
  boundary.	
  The	
  

10	
  

population	
  of	
  1440	
  students	
  is	
  55%	
  male	
  and	
  45%	
  female.	
  The	
  school	
  is	
  54.4%	
  Caucasian,	
  
16.9%	
  African	
  American,	
  10.8%	
  Asian,	
  9.8%	
  Multiethnic,	
  3.1%	
  Hispanic/Latino,	
  2.9%	
  Arab,	
  
0.3%	
  Native	
  American,	
  and	
  1.7%	
  of	
  students	
  who	
  identify	
  as	
  “other”.	
  Prior	
  to	
  the	
  2014-­‐
2015	
  school	
  year,	
  Skyline	
  was	
  identified	
  as	
  a	
  “Focus	
  School”	
  by	
  the	
  Michigan	
  Department	
  of	
  
Education	
  for	
  having	
  the	
  “largest	
  achievement	
  gap	
  between	
  the	
  top	
  and	
  bottom	
  30%	
  of	
  
students”	
  (MDE,	
  2015).	
  The	
  focus	
  school	
  designation	
  is	
  based	
  on	
  the	
  average	
  scale	
  score	
  as	
  
measured	
  on	
  the	
  Michigan	
  Merit	
  Exam,	
  or	
  MME.	
  
Skyline	
  High	
  School	
  operates	
  on	
  a	
  schedule	
  of	
  three	
  twelve-­‐week	
  trimesters	
  (Skyline	
  
High	
  School,	
  2013).	
  There	
  are	
  five	
  72-­‐minutes	
  periods	
  in	
  a	
  school	
  day.	
  In	
  AP	
  Biology,	
  the	
  
demographics	
  don’t	
  entirely	
  reflect	
  that	
  of	
  the	
  school	
  as	
  a	
  whole.	
  There	
  are	
  66	
  students	
  
enrolled	
  this	
  year	
  in	
  AP	
  Biology,	
  61.9%	
  of	
  them	
  identifying	
  as	
  Caucasian,	
  19.8%	
  Asian,	
  7.1%	
  
African	
  American,	
  4.8%	
  Middle	
  Eastern,	
  4.8%	
  Hispanic/Latino,	
  and	
  2.4%	
  Multiracial.	
  
Despite	
  our	
  efforts	
  to	
  reach	
  out	
  to	
  our	
  minority	
  population	
  for	
  inclusion	
  in	
  AP	
  and	
  higher-­‐
level	
  courses,	
  we	
  still	
  observe	
  fewer	
  students	
  of	
  color	
  in	
  the	
  AP	
  sciences,	
  a	
  problem	
  that	
  
extends	
  beyond	
  Skyline	
  and	
  Ann	
  Arbor.	
  Of	
  the	
  66	
  students	
  who	
  are	
  enrolled	
  in	
  the	
  course,	
  
47	
  students	
  were	
  enrolled	
  in	
  my	
  2	
  sections	
  of	
  AP	
  Biology.	
  Of	
  those	
  47	
  students,	
  39	
  agreed	
  
to	
  participate	
  in	
  the	
  study,	
  or	
  83%	
  participation.	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  

11	
  

IMPLEMENTATION	
  
General	
  Considerations	
  
	
  

To	
  implement	
  engagement	
  tools	
  and	
  techniques,	
  the	
  big	
  ideas	
  addressed	
  in	
  AP	
  

Biology	
  that	
  would	
  pique	
  students’	
  interest	
  and	
  apply	
  basic	
  concepts	
  taught	
  at	
  the	
  
beginning	
  of	
  the	
  year	
  were	
  considered.	
  Big	
  Idea	
  2:	
  Biological	
  systems	
  utilize	
  free	
  energy	
  and	
  
molecular	
  building	
  blocks	
  to	
  grow,	
  to	
  reproduce	
  and	
  to	
  maintain	
  dynamic	
  homeostasis	
  
(College	
  Board,	
  2012)	
  was	
  chosen	
  because	
  the	
  standards	
  addressed	
  include	
  understanding	
  
of	
  macromolecules	
  and	
  cell	
  structure,	
  which	
  are	
  introductory	
  units	
  in	
  the	
  course.	
  The	
  unit	
  
in	
  this	
  study	
  was	
  designed	
  using	
  the	
  theme	
  of	
  metabolism,	
  which	
  included	
  the	
  
aforementioned	
  standards	
  in	
  addition	
  to	
  understanding	
  of	
  cellular	
  respiration	
  and	
  
photosynthesis.	
  
	
  

Metabolism	
  is	
  typically	
  a	
  challenging	
  topic	
  to	
  learn	
  and	
  teach,	
  partly	
  because	
  of	
  the	
  

complex	
  biochemistry	
  associated	
  with	
  metabolic	
  pathways	
  and	
  partly	
  because	
  of	
  the	
  
inability	
  to	
  observe	
  it	
  directly.	
  We	
  rely	
  extensively	
  on	
  the	
  use	
  of	
  models	
  and	
  diagrams	
  to	
  
visualize	
  the	
  processes	
  of	
  cellular	
  respiration	
  and	
  photosynthesis	
  and	
  perform	
  lab	
  activities	
  
that	
  investigate	
  the	
  processes	
  on	
  a	
  large	
  scale	
  by	
  manipulating	
  variables	
  that	
  will	
  influence	
  
the	
  process	
  as	
  a	
  whole.	
  	
  
The	
  unit	
  was	
  subdivided	
  into	
  4	
  smaller	
  units:	
  Biochemistry,	
  Cell	
  Structure	
  and	
  
Function,	
  Cellular	
  Respiration,	
  and	
  Photosynthesis.	
  Due	
  to	
  the	
  length	
  of	
  the	
  PBL	
  
assessment,	
  the	
  entire	
  unit	
  was	
  implemented	
  over	
  the	
  course	
  of	
  15	
  weeks.	
  The	
  PBL	
  
assessment	
  was	
  presented	
  during	
  the	
  final	
  exam	
  periods	
  at	
  the	
  end	
  of	
  the	
  first	
  12-­‐week	
  
trimester.	
  The	
  remainder	
  of	
  the	
  unit	
  was	
  implemented	
  over	
  the	
  course	
  of	
  the	
  first	
  3	
  weeks	
  
of	
  the	
  second	
  trimester.	
  Table	
  1	
  shows	
  the	
  full	
  unit	
  plan	
  implementation.	
  

12	
  

TABLE	
  1:	
  Unit	
  plan	
  implementation	
  and	
  schedule	
  of	
  activities.	
  
Date	
  
Activities	
  
Objective(s)	
  
9/2/14	
  

Parent	
  letter	
  and	
  consent	
  form	
  sent	
  home	
  

9/5/14	
  

10/1/14	
  

Consent	
  forms	
  due	
  
Concept	
  Pre-­‐assessment	
  
PBL	
  component	
  launch	
  and	
  submit	
  project	
  
interest	
  form	
  
Meet	
  in	
  assigned	
  PBL	
  groups	
  and	
  submit	
  
project	
  proposal	
  
Properties	
  of	
  water	
  reading	
  (Ch.	
  3)	
  and	
  
Mastering	
  Biology	
  assigned	
  
Biochemistry	
  reading	
  (Chs.	
  4	
  &	
  5)	
  and	
  
Mastering	
  biology	
  assigned	
  
Properties	
  of	
  water	
  (Ch.	
  3)	
  Mastering	
  Biology	
  
due	
  
Biochemistry	
  (Chs.	
  4	
  &	
  5)	
  Mastering	
  Biology	
  
due	
  
ConcepTests	
  #1	
  &	
  #2	
  
ConcepTest	
  #3	
  
Enzymes	
  and	
  Metabolism	
  reading	
  (Ch.	
  8.4	
  &	
  
8.5)	
  and	
  Mastering	
  Biology	
  assigned	
  
PBL	
  Check-­‐in	
  #1—Charette	
  protocol	
  

10/3/14	
  

PBL	
  Assessment	
  work	
  day	
  

10/7/14	
  

ConcepTest	
  #4	
  
Enzymes	
  and	
  Metabolism	
  (Ch.	
  8.4	
  &	
  8.5)	
  
Mastering	
  Biology	
  due	
  
ConcepTest	
  #5	
  

9/9/14	
  
9/10/14	
  
9/15/14	
  
9/19/14	
  
9/28/14	
  

9/30/14	
  

10/9/14	
  

10/10/14	
   Biochemistry	
  unit	
  reflection	
  assigned	
  
10/13/14	
   Biochemistry	
  	
  unit	
  reflection	
  due	
  
10/14/14	
   Biochemistry	
  unit	
  test	
  
Cell	
  types	
  and	
  functions	
  reading	
  (Ch.	
  6)	
  and	
  
Mastering	
  Biology	
  assigned	
  
10/16/14	
   ConcepTest	
  #6	
  
10/17/14	
   PBL	
  assessment	
  work	
  day	
  
10/21/14	
   ConcepTest	
  #7	
  
10/22/14	
   PBL	
  Check-­‐in	
  #2—Gallery	
  Walk	
  

13	
  

Alert	
  parents	
  and	
  students	
  of	
  
research	
  study	
  
Determine	
  student	
  understanding	
  of	
  
biology	
  concepts	
  
Engage	
  students	
  in	
  PBL	
  assessment	
  
Provide	
  time	
  to	
  plan	
  PBL	
  project	
  
Provide	
  necessary	
  background	
  
understanding	
  of	
  content	
  
Provide	
  necessary	
  background	
  
understanding	
  of	
  content	
  
Formatively	
  assess	
  understanding	
  of	
  
macromolecules	
  

Formatively	
  assess	
  understanding	
  of	
  
properties	
  of	
  water	
  
Provide	
  PBL	
  teams	
  with	
  peer	
  
feedback	
  about	
  project	
  idea	
  
Provide	
  time	
  for	
  teams	
  to	
  work	
  on	
  
PBL	
  assessment	
  
Formatively	
  assess	
  understanding	
  of	
  
macromolecule	
  synthesis	
  
Formatively	
  assess	
  understanding	
  of	
  
enzymes	
  	
  
Assess	
  students	
  ability	
  to	
  connect	
  unit	
  
concepts	
  and	
  practice	
  writing	
  
	
  
Assess	
  student	
  understanding	
  of	
  
biochemistry	
  concepts	
  
Formatively	
  assess	
  understanding	
  of	
  
cell	
  types	
  
Provide	
  time	
  for	
  teams	
  to	
  work	
  on	
  
PBL	
  assessment	
  
Formatively	
  assess	
  understanding	
  of	
  
cell	
  transport	
  
Provide	
  PBL	
  teams	
  with	
  peer	
  
feedback	
  about	
  project	
  progress	
  

TABLE	
  1	
  (cont’d)	
  
10/23/14	
  
10/26/14	
  
10/27/14	
  
10/30/14	
  
11/2/14	
  
11/3/14	
  
11/5/14	
  
11/7/14	
  
11/9/14	
  
11/10/14	
  

11/12/14	
  
11/18/14	
  
11/19/14-­‐
11/20/14	
  
11/24/14	
  

Cell	
  types	
  and	
  functions	
  (Ch.	
  6)	
  Mastering	
  
Biology	
  due	
  
Cell	
  size	
  whiteboard	
  formative	
  assessment	
  
Membrane	
  structure	
  and	
  function	
  reading	
  
(Ch.	
  7)	
  and	
  Mastering	
  Biology	
  assigned	
  
ConcepTest	
  #8	
  

Formatively	
  assess	
  student	
  
understanding	
  of	
  cell	
  size	
  surface	
  area:	
  
volume	
  ratio	
  
Provide	
  necessary	
  background	
  
understanding	
  of	
  content	
  
Formatively	
  assess	
  understanding	
  of	
  
cell	
  structure	
  and	
  function	
  
ConcepTest	
  #9	
  
Formatively	
  assess	
  understanding	
  of	
  
PBL	
  Assessment	
  work	
  day	
  
cell	
  membrane	
  structure	
  and	
  
application	
  of	
  biochemistry	
  concepts	
  
Membrane	
  structure	
  and	
  function	
  Mastering	
   	
  
Biology	
  due	
  
Cell	
  structure	
  and	
  function	
  unit	
  reflection	
  
Assess	
  students	
  ability	
  to	
  connect	
  unit	
  
assigned	
  
concepts	
  and	
  practice	
  writing	
  
ConcepTest	
  #10	
  
Formatively	
  assess	
  understanding	
  of	
  
	
  
cell	
  types	
  
PBL	
  Check-­‐in	
  #3—Critical	
  Friends	
  protocol	
   Provide	
  PBL	
  teams	
  with	
  peer	
  feedback	
  
about	
  project	
  progress	
  
Cell	
  structure	
  and	
  function	
  unit	
  reflection	
  
	
  
due	
  
Cell	
  structure	
  and	
  function	
  unit	
  test	
  
Summatively	
  assess	
  student	
  
Introduction	
  to	
  metabolism	
  reading	
  (Ch.	
  8.1-­‐ understanding	
  of	
  cell	
  structure	
  and	
  
8.3,	
  9.1,	
  &	
  40.2)	
  and	
  Mastering	
  Biology	
  
function	
  concepts	
  
assigned	
  
PBL	
  Check-­‐in	
  #4—rough	
  draft	
  due	
  
Provide	
  teacher	
  feedback	
  to	
  PBL	
  teams	
  
on	
  assessment	
  	
  
Introduction	
  to	
  metabolism	
  (Ch.	
  8.1-­‐8.3,	
  9.1,	
   Formatively	
  assess	
  understanding	
  of	
  
&	
  40.2)	
  Mastering	
  Biology	
  due	
  
thermodynamics	
  and	
  metabolism	
  
ConcepTests	
  #11-­‐13	
  
PBL	
  Assessment	
  due/Media	
  Project	
  
Assess	
  student	
  completion	
  of	
  project	
  
Presentations	
  
and	
  student	
  ability	
  to	
  cite	
  evidence	
  
PBL	
  Reflection	
  assigned	
  during	
  presentation	
   about	
  most	
  convincing	
  claim	
  

12/9/14	
  

Cellular	
  Respiration	
  reading	
  (Ch.	
  9)	
  and	
  
Mastering	
  Biology	
  assigned	
  
Cellular	
  respiration	
  whiteboard	
  formative	
  
assessment	
  
Photosynthesis	
  reading	
  (Ch.	
  10)	
  and	
  
Mastering	
  Biology	
  assigned	
  
ConcepTests	
  #14	
  &	
  #15	
  

12/10/14	
  

ConcepTests	
  #16	
  &	
  #17	
  

12/12/14	
  

Cellular	
  respiration	
  unit	
  reflection	
  assigned	
  

12/16/14	
  

Photosynthesis	
  (Ch.	
  10)	
  Mastering	
  Biology	
  
due	
  

11/25/14	
  
12/8/14	
  

14	
  

Provide	
  necessary	
  background	
  
understanding	
  of	
  content	
  
Formatively	
  assess	
  understanding	
  of	
  
the	
  steps	
  of	
  cellular	
  respiration	
  
Provide	
  necessary	
  background	
  
understanding	
  of	
  content	
  
Formatively	
  assess	
  understanding	
  of	
  
aerobic/anaerobic	
  respiration	
  
Formatively	
  assess	
  understanding	
  of	
  
cellular	
  respiration	
  processes	
  
Assess	
  students	
  ability	
  to	
  connect	
  unit	
  
concepts	
  and	
  practice	
  writing	
  
	
  

TABLE	
  1	
  (cont’d)	
  
12/17/14	
  

ConcepTests	
  #18	
  &	
  #19	
  

12/18/14	
  

1/6/15	
  

Cellular	
  respiration	
  unit	
  reflection	
  due	
  
Cellular	
  respiration	
  unit	
  test	
  
Cellular	
  Respiration	
  (Ch.	
  9)	
  Mastering	
  
Biology	
  due	
  
ConcepTests	
  #20-­‐22	
  

1/9/15	
  

Photosynthesis	
  unit	
  reflection	
  assigned	
  

1/13/15	
  

ConcepTest	
  #23	
  

1/16/15	
  

Photosynthesis	
  unit	
  reflection	
  due	
  
Photosynthesis	
  unit	
  test	
  

Formatively	
  assess	
  understanding	
  of	
  
cellular	
  respiration	
  processes	
  
Summatively	
  assess	
  student	
  
understanding	
  of	
  cellular	
  respiration	
  
process	
  and	
  concepts	
  	
  
Formatively	
  assess	
  understanding	
  of	
  
photosynthetic	
  reactions	
  
Assess	
  students	
  ability	
  to	
  connect	
  unit	
  
concepts	
  and	
  practice	
  writing	
  
Formatively	
  assess	
  understanding	
  of	
  
photosynthetic	
  process	
  
Summatively	
  assess	
  student	
  
understanding	
  of	
  photosynthesis	
  
process	
  and	
  concepts	
  

	
  
Discussion	
  and	
  Analysis	
  of	
  Unit	
  Components	
  	
  
To	
  make	
  this	
  unit	
  more	
  interesting	
  and	
  engaging	
  to	
  students	
  because	
  of	
  its	
  difficulty	
  
and	
  abstractness,	
  the	
  unit	
  revolved	
  around	
  a	
  project	
  called	
  Burn,	
  Baby,	
  Burn	
  (see	
  Appendix	
  
A1).	
  The	
  project	
  required	
  students	
  to	
  investigate	
  diet	
  and	
  exercise	
  claims	
  and	
  how	
  they	
  
impact	
  obesity.	
  With	
  this	
  project,	
  students	
  were	
  required	
  to	
  perform	
  research,	
  collect	
  data,	
  
and	
  write	
  a	
  paper,	
  three	
  very	
  important	
  science	
  and	
  college	
  readiness	
  skills.	
  Students	
  also	
  
had	
  to	
  apply	
  their	
  understanding	
  of	
  cells,	
  macromolecules,	
  and	
  metabolic	
  pathways.	
  
To	
  assess	
  students’	
  understanding	
  of	
  the	
  concepts	
  that	
  the	
  unit	
  addressed,	
  students	
  
were	
  given	
  a	
  pre-­‐assessment	
  of	
  concepts	
  (see	
  Appendix	
  D1)	
  that	
  would	
  be	
  encountered	
  
over	
  the	
  term.	
  These	
  were	
  assessed	
  through	
  8	
  free-­‐response	
  items	
  that	
  were	
  scored	
  on	
  a	
  
scale	
  of	
  0-­‐2.	
  These	
  standards	
  were	
  assessed	
  throughout	
  the	
  unit	
  with	
  short,	
  formative	
  
assessments	
  in	
  small	
  and	
  large	
  group	
  formats	
  and	
  summative	
  assessments.	
  In	
  addition	
  to	
  
formal	
  assessments,	
  students	
  were	
  also	
  required	
  to	
  submit	
  a	
  reflection	
  for	
  each	
  unit	
  of	
  
study.	
  

15	
  

The	
  formative	
  assessments	
  utilized	
  included	
  ConcepTests	
  (see	
  Appendix	
  A2),	
  an	
  
idea	
  borrowed	
  from	
  Eric	
  Mazur.	
  Students	
  read	
  chapters	
  from	
  their	
  textbook,	
  Biology	
  (8th	
  
ed.)	
  by	
  Campbell	
  and	
  Reece	
  (2008),	
  and	
  completed	
  corresponding	
  online	
  assignments	
  
through	
  a	
  companion	
  site	
  called	
  Mastering	
  Biology.	
  The	
  assignments	
  on	
  Mastering	
  Biology	
  
were	
  designed	
  so	
  that	
  students	
  had	
  multiple	
  attempts	
  at	
  the	
  questions	
  and	
  were	
  scored	
  on	
  
a	
  100-­‐point	
  scale.	
  The	
  site	
  has	
  built-­‐in	
  settings	
  that	
  give	
  students	
  bonus	
  points	
  if	
  they	
  don’t	
  
use	
  any	
  hints	
  to	
  help	
  them	
  answer	
  the	
  questions,	
  thus	
  some	
  students	
  earned	
  scores	
  greater	
  
than	
  100	
  points.	
  The	
  day	
  after	
  these	
  assignments	
  were	
  due,	
  students	
  were	
  asked	
  multiple-­‐
choice	
  questions	
  that	
  applied	
  the	
  concepts	
  the	
  students	
  had	
  read	
  about	
  the	
  night	
  before.	
  
The	
  format	
  of	
  the	
  ConcepTests	
  was	
  to	
  pose	
  the	
  question	
  and	
  poll	
  for	
  results,	
  then	
  have	
  the	
  
students	
  turn	
  to	
  a	
  partner	
  and	
  discuss	
  their	
  answer.	
  After	
  discussion	
  with	
  a	
  partner,	
  the	
  
question	
  was	
  asked	
  again.	
  If	
  all	
  students	
  got	
  the	
  correct	
  answer,	
  very	
  little	
  discussion	
  
ensued.	
  If	
  answers	
  varied,	
  we	
  had	
  a	
  class	
  discussion	
  to	
  get	
  students	
  to	
  a	
  better	
  
understanding	
  of	
  the	
  concept.	
  Students	
  wrote	
  their	
  answer	
  choice	
  on	
  small	
  (8	
  ½”	
  x	
  11”)	
  
whiteboards	
  and	
  held	
  them	
  up	
  in	
  the	
  air	
  when	
  requested.	
  An	
  additional	
  formative	
  
assessment	
  employed	
  throughout	
  the	
  unit	
  was	
  the	
  use	
  of	
  whiteboards	
  or	
  creating	
  posters	
  
to	
  demonstrate	
  understanding	
  of	
  key	
  concepts.	
  This	
  was	
  often	
  done	
  toward	
  the	
  end	
  of	
  the	
  
unit	
  as	
  a	
  review.	
  	
  
To	
  further	
  engage	
  students	
  with	
  the	
  content	
  and	
  assess	
  their	
  understanding	
  of	
  
concepts,	
  students	
  submitted	
  a	
  written	
  reflection	
  for	
  each	
  unit.	
  This	
  reflection	
  was	
  500	
  
words	
  or	
  less	
  and	
  had	
  to	
  connect	
  the	
  smaller	
  ideas,	
  such	
  as	
  chemical	
  bonding,	
  function	
  and	
  
structure	
  of	
  macromolecules,	
  properties	
  of	
  water,	
  and	
  intermolecular	
  interactions	
  together	
  
into	
  a	
  cohesive	
  understanding	
  of	
  each	
  unit,	
  how	
  macromolecules	
  are	
  synthesized	
  and	
  

16	
  

function	
  in	
  cells	
  (see	
  Appendix	
  A3).	
  The	
  major	
  premise	
  of	
  this	
  thesis	
  is	
  that	
  participation	
  in	
  
the	
  activities	
  I	
  described	
  (Mastering	
  Biology	
  assignments,	
  ConcepTests,	
  reflective	
  writing,	
  
unit	
  project)	
  would	
  correspond	
  to	
  stronger	
  understanding	
  of	
  the	
  concepts	
  as	
  measured	
  
through	
  free-­‐writing	
  prompts.	
  	
  
	
  
	
  
Components	
  of	
  the	
  Unit	
  
Component	
  1:	
  Mastering	
  Biology	
  
	
  

This	
  is	
  a	
  companion	
  site	
  to	
  the	
  AP	
  Biology	
  textbook,	
  Biology	
  (8th	
  ed.)	
  by	
  Campbell	
  &	
  

Reece	
  (2008).	
  Students	
  must	
  log	
  in	
  to	
  the	
  site	
  to	
  complete	
  the	
  assignments.	
  With	
  each	
  
assigned	
  reading	
  from	
  the	
  textbook,	
  students	
  completed	
  a	
  Mastering	
  Biology	
  assignment,	
  
which	
  consisted	
  of	
  animations,	
  multiple	
  choice	
  questions,	
  and	
  interactive	
  simulations.	
  The	
  
assignments	
  were	
  resumable	
  and	
  students	
  had	
  approximately	
  7-­‐10	
  days	
  to	
  complete	
  each	
  
assignment	
  before	
  we	
  discussed	
  them	
  in	
  class.	
  	
  
	
  
Component	
  2:	
  ConcepTests	
  
	
  

ConcepTest	
  is	
  a	
  termed	
  coined	
  by	
  Eric	
  Mazur	
  (1997)	
  in	
  describing	
  his	
  approach	
  to	
  

conceptual	
  teaching	
  and	
  learning.	
  A	
  ConcepTest	
  is	
  a	
  multiple-­‐choice	
  question	
  that	
  is	
  based	
  
on	
  fundamental	
  concepts	
  in	
  the	
  course.	
  Following	
  each	
  Mastering	
  Biology	
  assignment,	
  class	
  
began	
  with	
  2-­‐3	
  ConcepTest	
  questions	
  that	
  addressed	
  key	
  concepts	
  of	
  each	
  unit.	
  Students	
  
read	
  each	
  question	
  (projected	
  on	
  the	
  screen),	
  wrote	
  their	
  answer	
  choice	
  on	
  a	
  small	
  
whiteboard,	
  and	
  results	
  were	
  tallied.	
  Then,	
  students	
  turned	
  to	
  a	
  partner	
  to	
  discuss	
  their	
  

17	
  

answers	
  and	
  voted	
  again.	
  If	
  warranted,	
  the	
  topic	
  was	
  discussed.	
  The	
  list	
  of	
  ConcepTest	
  
questions	
  used	
  in	
  this	
  unit	
  is	
  included	
  in	
  Appendix	
  A2.	
  
	
  

Component	
  3:	
  Whiteboards	
  as	
  a	
  Formative	
  Assessment	
  
	
  

In	
  following	
  an	
  inquiry-­‐based	
  and	
  student-­‐centered	
  approach	
  to	
  teaching,	
  it’s	
  

important	
  to	
  check	
  for	
  students’	
  understanding	
  about	
  key	
  concepts	
  they	
  are	
  learning.	
  The	
  
Mastering	
  Biology	
  assignments	
  provide	
  an	
  accountability	
  piece	
  for	
  making	
  sure	
  students	
  
are	
  reading	
  the	
  textbook	
  and	
  understand	
  what	
  they	
  read.	
  The	
  ConcepTests	
  are	
  another	
  way	
  
to	
  check	
  in	
  with	
  students.	
  They	
  also	
  get	
  students	
  involved	
  with	
  the	
  content	
  due	
  to	
  the	
  
interactive	
  and	
  social	
  nature	
  of	
  Peer	
  Instruction	
  and	
  Turn	
  To	
  Your	
  Neighbor.	
  Large	
  
whiteboards	
  allow	
  for	
  students	
  to	
  demonstrate	
  what	
  they	
  know	
  and	
  understand	
  about	
  
concepts.	
  Students	
  modeled	
  their	
  thinking	
  and	
  metacognitive	
  processes.	
  Because	
  the	
  
whiteboards	
  are	
  editable,	
  students	
  easily	
  made	
  corrections	
  when	
  their	
  peers	
  or	
  the	
  
instructor	
  points	
  out	
  an	
  error	
  in	
  their	
  thinking.	
  Students	
  worked	
  in	
  small	
  groups	
  on	
  a	
  
whiteboard	
  assessment	
  and	
  presented	
  to	
  other	
  groups	
  or	
  to	
  the	
  entire	
  class.	
  The	
  
presentations	
  required	
  students	
  to	
  justify	
  their	
  thinking	
  and	
  explain	
  graphics	
  they	
  used.	
  
Sample	
  whiteboard	
  assessments	
  of	
  cell	
  surface	
  area	
  to	
  volume	
  ratio	
  and	
  cellular	
  
respiration	
  are	
  shown	
  in	
  Figures	
  1	
  and	
  2.	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  

18	
  

FIGURE	
  1:	
  Whiteboard	
  Assessment	
  samples	
  
These	
  whiteboard	
  samples	
  were	
  utilized	
  in	
  the	
  cell	
  structure	
  and	
  function	
  unit.	
  Groups	
  of	
  3-­‐4	
  
students	
  responded	
  to	
  the	
  prompt,	
  “Explain	
  how	
  alveoli	
  increase	
  the	
  surface	
  area	
  available	
  for	
  gas	
  
exchange	
  in	
  the	
  lungs.”	
  

	
  
FIGURE	
  2:	
  Whiteboard	
  Assessment	
  samples	
  
These	
  whiteboard	
  samples	
  were	
  utilized	
  in	
  the	
  cellular	
  respiration	
  unit.	
  Groups	
  of	
  3-­‐4	
  students	
  
responded	
  to	
  the	
  prompt,	
  “Diagram	
  the	
  process	
  of	
  cellular	
  respiration.”	
  

	
  
	
  	
  

	
  
	
  

19	
  

Component	
  4:	
  Using	
  Socratic	
  Dialogue	
  
	
  

The	
  use	
  of	
  Socratic	
  dialogue	
  facilitates	
  deeper	
  and	
  more	
  interactive	
  discussion	
  (Paul	
  

and	
  Binker,	
  2012).	
  Students	
  practiced	
  Socratic	
  dialogue	
  techniques	
  in	
  the	
  form	
  of	
  
bookmarks	
  using	
  sentence	
  starters	
  to	
  push	
  their	
  peers	
  to	
  justify	
  explanations	
  with	
  
evidence	
  and	
  think	
  more	
  deeply	
  about	
  the	
  topic	
  (see	
  Appendix	
  A4).	
  The	
  bookmarks	
  were	
  
adapted	
  from	
  Lucy	
  Calkins’	
  book,	
  The	
  Art	
  of	
  Teaching	
  Reading	
  and	
  Ready,	
  Set,	
  Science	
  by	
  
Sarah	
  Michaels,	
  Andrew	
  W.	
  Shouse,	
  and	
  Heidi	
  Schweingruber.	
  Students	
  practiced	
  using	
  the	
  
sentence	
  starters	
  during	
  whiteboard	
  presentations,	
  feedback	
  protocols	
  for	
  the	
  PBL	
  
component,	
  and	
  project	
  presentations.	
  	
  
	
  

Component	
  5:	
  Project	
  Based	
  Learning	
  
	
  

The	
  PBL	
  component	
  was	
  the	
  highlight	
  of	
  this	
  unit	
  plan	
  in	
  that	
  it	
  connected	
  the	
  

individual	
  subunits	
  together	
  in	
  one	
  comprehensive	
  activity	
  and	
  assessment.	
  This	
  project	
  
was	
  the	
  students’	
  final	
  assessment	
  for	
  the	
  unit	
  and	
  was	
  presented	
  during	
  the	
  final	
  exam	
  
period	
  at	
  the	
  end	
  of	
  the	
  first	
  trimester	
  in	
  November	
  2014.	
  Students	
  were	
  first	
  exposed	
  to	
  
this	
  project	
  idea	
  in	
  the	
  first	
  week	
  of	
  the	
  term.	
  Following	
  the	
  “8	
  Essentials	
  for	
  Project-­‐Based	
  
Learning”	
  (Larner	
  and	
  Mergendoller,	
  2010),	
  the	
  project	
  was	
  introduced	
  with	
  an	
  opening	
  
activity,	
  the	
  trailer	
  for	
  HBO’s	
  “The	
  Weight	
  of	
  the	
  Nation”.	
  This	
  is	
  a	
  4-­‐part	
  documentary	
  film	
  
series	
  that	
  explores	
  the	
  obesity	
  problem	
  in	
  the	
  United	
  States	
  through	
  case	
  studies,	
  scientific	
  
analyses,	
  and	
  factors	
  that	
  lead	
  to	
  obesity.	
  The	
  trailer,	
  one	
  and	
  a	
  half	
  minutes	
  long,	
  is	
  
emotional	
  and	
  engaging.	
  Students	
  were	
  shown	
  a	
  PowerPoint	
  presentation	
  that	
  showcased	
  
many	
  of	
  the	
  supposed	
  claims	
  that	
  fight	
  obesity,	
  such	
  as	
  fad	
  diets	
  and	
  weight-­‐loss	
  
supplements.	
  The	
  class	
  then	
  developed	
  the	
  driving	
  question,	
  “How	
  do	
  different	
  diet	
  and	
  

20	
  

exercise	
  claims	
  measure	
  up	
  to	
  addressing	
  the	
  obesity	
  epidemic	
  in	
  the	
  United	
  States?”	
  and	
  
brainstormed	
  a	
  list	
  of	
  concepts	
  they	
  needed	
  to	
  know	
  to	
  answer	
  this	
  question.	
  The	
  Need	
  to	
  
Know	
  list	
  that	
  the	
  students	
  generated	
  is	
  shown	
  in	
  Table	
  2.	
  
TABLE	
  2:	
  Need	
  to	
  Know	
  list	
  generated	
  as	
  part	
  of	
  the	
  introduction	
  to	
  the	
  PBL	
  unit.	
  
The	
  Need	
  to	
  Know	
  list	
  includes	
  concepts	
  and	
  questions	
  that	
  students	
  determined	
  were	
  necessary	
  to	
  
answer	
  the	
  driving	
  question	
  for	
  the	
  PBL	
  assessment	
  
Need	
  to	
  Know:	
  Concepts	
  and	
  questions	
  that	
  students	
  must	
  know	
  in	
  order	
  to	
  answer	
  the	
  
driving	
  question,	
  “How	
  do	
  different	
  diet	
  and	
  exercise	
  claims	
  measure	
  up	
  to	
  addressing	
  the	
  
obesity	
  epidemic	
  in	
  the	
  United	
  States?	
  	
  
• What	
  biological	
  processes	
  lead	
  to	
  obesity?	
  
• How	
  does	
  the	
  body	
  process	
  food?	
  
o Digestion	
  
o Cellular	
  energy	
  
o Function	
  of	
  carbohydrates,	
  lipids,	
  and	
  proteins	
  
• How	
  does	
  exercise	
  affect	
  the	
  body?	
  
o What	
  is	
  a	
  healthy	
  level	
  for	
  your	
  body?	
  
o What	
  is	
  the	
  affect	
  on	
  metrics	
  like	
  heart	
  rate	
  and	
  blood	
  pressure?	
  
• Vocabulary	
  terms	
  
• What	
  are	
  consequences	
  of	
  obesity?	
  
	
  
	
  

The	
  project	
  (see	
  Appendix	
  A1	
  for	
  description)	
  was	
  introduced	
  by	
  students	
  

brainstorming	
  topics	
  of	
  interest	
  to	
  them	
  and	
  submitting	
  their	
  ideas	
  to	
  a	
  Google®	
  form.	
  
Students	
  worked	
  in	
  groups	
  of	
  3-­‐5	
  students	
  based	
  on	
  similar	
  interests.	
  A	
  sample	
  of	
  students’	
  
interests	
  is	
  shown	
  in	
  Figure	
  3.	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  

21	
  

FIGURE	
  3:	
  Sample	
  responses	
  to	
  PBL	
  Project	
  Interest	
  Form.	
  
Students	
  were	
  placed	
  in	
  groups	
  based	
  on	
  their	
  responses	
  to	
  this	
  form.	
  

	
  
Students	
  met	
  with	
  their	
  team	
  members	
  the	
  day	
  after	
  completing	
  the	
  interest	
  form	
  and	
  
submitted	
  a	
  project	
  proposal.	
  All	
  teams	
  were	
  responsible	
  for	
  writing	
  a	
  research	
  paper,	
  but	
  
they	
  also	
  had	
  to	
  create	
  a	
  media	
  presentation	
  of	
  their	
  choice	
  to	
  share	
  their	
  findings.	
  The	
  
presentation	
  was	
  designed	
  to	
  target	
  a	
  specific	
  audience	
  and	
  provide	
  a	
  creative	
  outlet	
  for	
  
their	
  work.	
  Sample	
  project	
  proposals	
  are	
  displayed	
  in	
  Appendix	
  A5.	
  	
  
Students	
  followed	
  the	
  format	
  suggested	
  by	
  the	
  Science	
  Writing	
  Heuristic	
  (Burke	
  et.	
  
al.,	
  2005)	
  for	
  organizing	
  their	
  research	
  (see	
  Figure	
  4).	
   	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  

22	
  

FIGURE	
  4:	
  The	
  Science	
  Writing	
  Heuristic	
  student	
  template	
  (from	
  Burke	
  et.	
  al.,	
  2005)	
  

	
  
Once	
  student	
  teams	
  decided	
  on	
  a	
  research	
  question,	
  they	
  began	
  to	
  plan	
  out	
  their	
  procedure	
  
and	
  assign	
  roles.	
  The	
  Team	
  Task	
  List	
  (BIE,	
  2012)	
  in	
  Appendix	
  A6	
  was	
  given	
  to	
  each	
  group	
  
to	
  indicate	
  which	
  team	
  member	
  was	
  responsible	
  for	
  each	
  part	
  of	
  the	
  project	
  and	
  was	
  
submitted	
  to	
  me	
  with	
  their	
  final	
  project.	
  
	
  

One	
  class	
  period	
  every	
  week	
  or	
  two	
  was	
  devoted	
  to	
  project	
  development;	
  students	
  

also	
  met	
  after	
  school	
  to	
  work	
  on	
  their	
  project.	
  Regular	
  check-­‐ins	
  (Appendix	
  A7)	
  provided	
  
the	
  teams	
  valuable	
  feedback	
  to	
  further	
  their	
  work,	
  and	
  helped	
  teams	
  generate	
  additional	
  
ideas	
  about	
  their	
  projects.	
  Students	
  also	
  practiced	
  using	
  Socratic	
  dialogue	
  sentence	
  starters	
  
(Appendix	
  A4)	
  to	
  model	
  respectful	
  and	
  focused	
  discussion.	
  The	
  feedback	
  protocols	
  were	
  
scaffolded	
  so	
  students	
  shared	
  more	
  of	
  their	
  projects	
  with	
  one	
  another	
  during	
  each	
  check-­‐in,	
  
ending	
  ultimately	
  with	
  a	
  poster	
  presentation	
  as	
  we	
  moved	
  closer	
  to	
  the	
  deadline	
  of	
  the	
  
project.	
  The	
  final	
  check-­‐in	
  was	
  for	
  students	
  to	
  share	
  a	
  rough	
  draft	
  of	
  their	
  paper	
  with	
  me	
  to	
  
receive	
  feedback	
  before	
  submitting	
  the	
  final	
  version.	
  Most	
  papers	
  were	
  submitted	
  via	
  
Google®	
  documents.	
  

23	
  

	
  

On	
  the	
  final	
  exam	
  day,	
  student	
  teams	
  presented	
  their	
  projects.	
  Each	
  group	
  prepared	
  

a	
  media	
  presentation	
  of	
  their	
  choice	
  that	
  described	
  the	
  claim	
  they	
  were	
  analyzing	
  and	
  the	
  
evidence	
  behind	
  it.	
  As	
  each	
  team	
  presented,	
  the	
  audience	
  was	
  listening	
  for	
  the	
  most	
  
convincing	
  evidence	
  to	
  respond	
  to	
  the	
  reflection	
  prompt,	
  “If	
  you	
  were	
  in	
  a	
  position	
  to	
  lose	
  
weight	
  or	
  get	
  in	
  shape,	
  which	
  method	
  that	
  you	
  heard	
  about	
  would	
  you	
  try	
  &	
  why?	
  Please	
  
refer	
  to	
  specific	
  evidence	
  presented.”	
  (Appendix	
  A8)	
  At	
  the	
  end	
  of	
  each	
  presentation,	
  
audience	
  members	
  had	
  an	
  opportunity	
  to	
  ask	
  probing	
  and	
  clarifying	
  questions.	
  In	
  addition	
  
to	
  the	
  media	
  presentation	
  and	
  research	
  papers,	
  students	
  submitted	
  a	
  self-­‐reflection	
  to	
  
provide	
  feedback	
  to	
  me	
  about	
  how	
  the	
  team	
  worked	
  together	
  and	
  what	
  students	
  thought	
  
they	
  did	
  well	
  or	
  needed	
  to	
  improve.	
  	
  
	
  
Component	
  6:	
  Reflective	
  Writing	
  
	
  

The	
  final	
  component	
  to	
  this	
  unit	
  plan	
  was	
  the	
  use	
  of	
  reflective	
  writing	
  (Appendix	
  

A3).	
  Students	
  were	
  assigned	
  a	
  reflection	
  with	
  each	
  subunit	
  of	
  study	
  so	
  that	
  students	
  could	
  
make	
  connections	
  between	
  concepts	
  learned	
  over	
  the	
  course	
  of	
  each	
  subunit	
  and	
  show	
  
their	
  understanding	
  of	
  those	
  concepts.	
  Each	
  reflection	
  followed	
  the	
  same	
  guidelines	
  and	
  
was	
  submitted	
  prior	
  to	
  a	
  unit	
  test.	
  	
  
	
  

In	
  addition	
  to	
  reflective	
  writing,	
  students	
  also	
  wrote	
  lab	
  reports	
  and	
  responded	
  to	
  

short	
  and	
  long-­‐free	
  response	
  assessment	
  items.	
  These	
  were	
  evaluated	
  using	
  the	
  SWH	
  
(Figure	
  4),	
  but	
  modified	
  into	
  a	
  scoring	
  rubric	
  for	
  the	
  analysis	
  of	
  lab	
  reports	
  (Appendix	
  A9).	
  	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  

24	
  

RESULTS	
  AND	
  ANALYSIS	
  
Pre-­‐Test	
  and	
  Post-­‐Test	
  Administration	
  
	
  

The	
  Concept	
  Assessment	
  was	
  designed	
  to	
  measure	
  student	
  understanding	
  of	
  

essential	
  biology	
  concepts	
  and	
  served	
  as	
  the	
  main	
  assessment	
  tool.	
  It	
  (Appendix	
  D1)	
  was	
  
administered	
  during	
  the	
  first	
  week	
  of	
  school	
  as	
  an	
  8-­‐item,	
  free	
  response	
  test.	
  Students	
  were	
  
prompted	
  to	
  answer	
  each	
  question	
  to	
  the	
  best	
  of	
  their	
  prior	
  knowledge	
  and	
  if	
  students	
  did	
  
not	
  know	
  the	
  answer	
  to	
  a	
  question,	
  to	
  leave	
  it	
  blank.	
  The	
  free-­‐response	
  assessment	
  items	
  
were	
  aligned	
  to	
  AP	
  Biology	
  Learning	
  Objectives	
  (LO).	
  For	
  the	
  post-­‐test	
  administration,	
  the	
  
questions	
  corresponding	
  to	
  each	
  LO	
  were	
  divided	
  among	
  the	
  4	
  sub-­‐unit	
  tests	
  administered	
  
throughout	
  the	
  term.	
  Responses	
  to	
  the	
  items	
  were	
  scored	
  on	
  a	
  scale	
  of	
  0-­‐2.	
  
	
  

Participation	
  in	
  the	
  components	
  described	
  in	
  the	
  Implementation	
  section	
  was	
  tied	
  

to	
  the	
  unit	
  concept	
  assessment.	
  The	
  PBL	
  component	
  was	
  assessed	
  separately	
  due	
  to	
  its	
  
comprehensive	
  nature	
  as	
  a	
  stand-­‐alone	
  assessment.	
  The	
  PBL	
  assessment	
  rubric	
  is	
  in	
  
Appendix	
  D2.	
  
	
  
Data	
  Analysis—Combined	
  Pre-­‐test	
  and	
  Post-­‐test	
  Item	
  Analysis	
  
	
  

Table	
  3	
  provides	
  a	
  breakdown	
  of	
  each	
  LO	
  assessed	
  and	
  the	
  average	
  pre-­‐test	
  score,	
  

post-­‐test	
  score,	
  and	
  gain	
  among	
  all	
  research	
  participants.	
  A	
  one-­‐tailed,	
  paired	
  t-­‐test	
  was	
  
used	
  to	
  show	
  statistical	
  significance	
  of	
  observed	
  gains	
  for	
  each	
  learning	
  objective.	
  A	
  
statistically	
  significant	
  change	
  was	
  observed	
  among	
  all	
  assessment	
  items,	
  showing	
  an	
  
overall	
  gain	
  of	
  0.56	
  points.	
  	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  

25	
  

TABLE	
  3:	
  Concept	
  Assessment	
  pre-­‐test	
  and	
  post-­‐test	
  scores	
  (n=39)	
  
Paired	
  t-­‐test	
  showing	
  statistical	
  significance	
  of	
  gain	
  in	
  post-­‐test	
  scores	
  
Scoring	
  Guidelines:	
  
0—No	
  response	
  given	
  or	
  “I	
  don’t	
  know”	
  
1—Explanation	
  is	
  given,	
  but	
  it	
  is	
  incomplete	
  or	
  demonstrates	
  a	
  lack	
  of	
  understanding	
  
2—Explanation	
  is	
  given	
  and	
  demonstrates	
  understanding	
  of	
  concept	
  
Learning	
  Objective	
  
Pre-­‐test	
   Post-­‐
Gain	
  	
  
Average	
   test	
  
Average	
  
The	
  student	
  is	
  able	
  to	
  use	
  representations	
  and	
  models	
   0.54	
  
1.79	
  
+1.25	
  
to	
  describe	
  differences	
  in	
  prokaryotic	
  and	
  eukaryotic	
  
	
  
cells.	
  (LO	
  2.14)	
  

p-­‐value	
  
3.76E-­‐11	
  
	
  

The	
  student	
  is	
  able	
  to	
  justify	
  the	
  selection	
  of	
  data	
  
0.72	
  
regarding	
  the	
  types	
  of	
  molecules	
  that	
  an	
  animal,	
  plant	
  
or	
  bacterium	
  will	
  take	
  up	
  as	
  necessary	
  building	
  blocks	
  
and	
  excrete	
  as	
  waste	
  products.	
  (LO	
  2.8)	
  

1.90	
  

+1.18	
  

1.17E-­‐11	
  
	
  

The	
  student	
  is	
  able	
  to	
  construct	
  models	
  that	
  connect	
  
the	
  movement	
  of	
  molecules	
  across	
  membranes	
  with	
  
membrane	
  structure	
  and	
  function.	
  (LO	
  2.11)	
  

0.67	
  

1.62	
  

+0.95	
  

3.35E-­‐08	
  
	
  

The	
  student	
  is	
  able	
  to	
  explain	
  the	
  connection	
  between	
  
the	
  sequence	
  and	
  the	
  subcomponents	
  of	
  a	
  biological	
  
polymer	
  and	
  its	
  properties.	
  (LO	
  4.1)	
  

0.49	
  

1.64	
  

+1.15	
  

1.07E-­‐12	
  
	
  

The	
  student	
  is	
  able	
  to	
  explain	
  how	
  biological	
  systems	
  
use	
  free	
  energy	
  based	
  on	
  empirical	
  data	
  that	
  all	
  
organisms	
  require	
  constant	
  energy	
  input	
  to	
  maintain	
  
organization,	
  to	
  grow	
  and	
  to	
  reproduce.	
  (LO	
  2.1)	
  

0.82	
  

1.62	
  

+0.80	
  

6.97E-­‐11	
  
	
  

The	
  student	
  is	
  able	
  to	
  explain	
  how	
  internal	
  
membranes	
  and	
  organelles	
  contribute	
  to	
  cell	
  
functions.	
  (LO	
  2.13)	
  

0.74	
  

1.87	
  

+1.13	
  

3.52E-­‐15	
  
	
  

The	
  student	
  is	
  able	
  to	
  explain	
  how	
  biological	
  systems	
  
use	
  free	
  energy	
  based	
  on	
  empirical	
  data	
  that	
  all	
  
organisms	
  require	
  constant	
  energy	
  input	
  to	
  maintain	
  
organization,	
  to	
  grow	
  and	
  to	
  reproduce.	
  (LO	
  2.1)	
  

0.54	
  

1.74	
  

+1.20	
  

4.55E-­‐16	
  
	
  

The	
  student	
  is	
  able	
  to	
  construct	
  explanations	
  of	
  the	
  
mechanisms	
  and	
  structural	
  features	
  of	
  cells	
  that	
  allow	
  
organisms	
  to	
  capture,	
  store	
  or	
  use	
  free	
  energy.	
  (LO	
  
2.5)	
  

0.59	
  

1.95	
  

+1.36	
  

4.77E-­‐20	
  
	
  

Total	
  Score	
  	
  

0.32	
  

0.88	
  

+0.56	
  

4.53E-­‐19	
  
	
  

•

Students	
  are	
  able	
  to	
  explain	
  the	
  role	
  of	
  
enzymes	
  in	
  the	
  use	
  of	
  free	
  energy.	
  

26	
  

	
  

Figure	
  5	
  shows	
  the	
  PBL	
  assessment	
  scores	
  as	
  grouped	
  by	
  percentages.	
  The	
  average	
  score	
  
on	
  this	
  assessment	
  was	
  97%.	
  
FIGURE	
  5:	
  PBL	
  Student	
  Assessment	
  Scores	
  (n=39)	
  
This	
  figure	
  displays	
  student	
  percentages	
  on	
  the	
  PBL	
  Assessment	
  
Average	
  score	
  =97%	
  

	
  

	
  

	
  
Data	
  Analysis—Evaluation	
  of	
  Practices	
  
	
  

The	
  main	
  objective	
  of	
  this	
  unit	
  implementation	
  was	
  to	
  determine	
  if	
  engagement	
  

tools	
  and	
  techniques	
  positively	
  influenced	
  conceptual	
  understanding,	
  as	
  measured	
  by	
  the	
  
Concept	
  Assessment	
  (Appendix	
  D1).	
  Table	
  4	
  shows	
  the	
  percentage	
  of	
  students	
  
participating	
  in	
  each	
  of	
  the	
  three	
  components	
  implemented	
  in	
  this	
  unit.	
  Average	
  scores	
  for	
  
Mastering	
  Biology	
  assignments	
  and	
  unit	
  reflections	
  are	
  included.	
  
TABLE	
  4:	
  Engagement	
  Tools	
  and	
  Percent	
  Participation	
  (n=39)	
  
Student	
  participation	
  in	
  the	
  three	
  components	
  implemented	
  in	
  this	
  unit	
  
Engagement	
  Tool	
  
Average	
  %	
  Participation	
  
Average	
  Score	
  
Mastering	
  Biology	
  

88%	
  

73.4%	
  

ConcepTests	
  

86%	
  

N/A	
  

Unit	
  Reflections	
  

73%	
  

65.2%	
  

27	
  

Data	
  Analysis—PBL	
  Assessment	
  
	
  

The	
  final	
  project	
  submission	
  for	
  the	
  PBL	
  assessment	
  included	
  the	
  written	
  research	
  

report	
  (see	
  Appendix	
  B	
  for	
  exemplar),	
  the	
  media	
  presentation,	
  a	
  team	
  task	
  list,	
  and	
  one	
  
self-­‐reflection	
  (Appendix	
  A10)	
  per	
  student.	
  Common	
  responses	
  to	
  the	
  self-­‐reflection	
  
questions	
  are	
  reported	
  in	
  Table	
  5.	
  
TABLE	
  5:	
  PBL	
  Self-­‐Reflection	
  Responses	
  
A	
  report	
  of	
  common	
  responses	
  to	
  the	
  self-­‐reflection	
  component	
  of	
  the	
  PBL	
  Assessment	
  
Was	
  this	
  
All	
  students	
  (n=39)	
  reported	
  that	
  the	
  project	
  was	
  very	
  interesting	
  to	
  them	
  for	
  
project	
  
various	
  reasons	
  relating	
  to	
  the	
  topic	
  they	
  selected.	
  
interesting	
  to	
  
you?	
  Why	
  or	
  
why	
  not?	
  
What	
  is	
  the	
  
Most	
  students	
  stated	
  that	
  the	
  most	
  important	
  thing	
  they	
  learned	
  related	
  directly	
  
most	
  important	
   to	
  their	
  topic.	
  But,	
  some	
  students	
  noted	
  that	
  they	
  learned	
  how	
  to	
  use	
  resources	
  
thing	
  you	
  
during	
  this	
  project,	
  how	
  to	
  distribute	
  labor/tasks,	
  and	
  that	
  research	
  studies	
  take	
  
learned	
  in	
  this	
   time.	
  
project?	
  
	
  
What	
  do	
  you	
  
Divide	
  work	
  more	
  evenly	
  
wish	
  you	
  had	
  
Outline	
  research	
  
spent	
  more	
  
Collect	
  more	
  data	
  or	
  from	
  a	
  larger	
  sample	
  size	
  
time	
  on	
  or	
  done	
   Start	
  earlier	
  
differently?	
  
Create	
  a	
  better	
  media	
  presentation	
  
Performed	
  lab	
  activities	
  at	
  the	
  beginning	
  	
  
Organized	
  data	
  differently	
  
Performed	
  a	
  controlled	
  experiment	
  
Collected	
  original	
  data	
  instead	
  of	
  published	
  data	
  
On	
  what	
  part	
  of	
   Various	
  answers	
  
the	
  project	
  did	
  
you	
  do	
  your	
  
best	
  work?	
  
How	
  well	
  did	
  
Worked	
  well	
  together,	
  but	
  work	
  not	
  divided	
  equally	
  
your	
  group	
  
Even	
  work	
  load	
  for	
  all	
  team	
  members	
  
collaborate?	
  
Team	
  got	
  distracted	
  because	
  they	
  were	
  all	
  friends	
  
Explain.	
  
Not	
  all	
  teammates	
  worked	
  as	
  hard	
  as	
  others	
  
Lack	
  of	
  communication	
  
The	
  team	
  excluded	
  some	
  members	
  
The	
  project	
  allowed	
  team	
  members	
  to	
  get	
  to	
  know	
  each	
  other	
  better	
  
How	
  well	
  did	
  
Team	
  wasn’t	
  as	
  productive	
  as	
  they	
  could	
  have	
  been	
  
your	
  group	
  
Team	
  made	
  good	
  use	
  of	
  time	
  
make	
  use	
  of	
  
The	
  team	
  met	
  frequently	
  outside	
  of	
  class.	
  
time?	
  Explain.	
  
The	
  team	
  was	
  more	
  efficient	
  as	
  time	
  went	
  on.	
  
Felt	
  rushed	
  at	
  the	
  end	
  
Trouble	
  staying	
  on	
  task	
  
Procrastination	
  

28	
  

Students	
  completed	
  another	
  reflection	
  following	
  the	
  PBL	
  project	
  presentations.	
  
They	
  responded	
  to	
  a	
  prompt	
  and	
  cited	
  specific	
  evidence	
  to	
  support	
  their	
  answer	
  (Appendix	
  
A8).	
  The	
  7	
  different	
  project	
  topics	
  are	
  displayed	
  in	
  Table	
  5	
  as	
  well	
  as	
  the	
  percentage	
  of	
  
students	
  who	
  identified	
  each	
  one	
  as	
  the	
  most	
  effective.	
  Some	
  students	
  described	
  a	
  
combination	
  of	
  methods	
  as	
  most	
  effective.	
  Sample	
  quotes	
  from	
  student	
  reflections	
  are	
  
included	
  as	
  evidence.	
  
	
  

TABLE	
  6:	
  PBL	
  Reflection	
  Responses	
  
A	
  summary	
  of	
  which	
  project	
  claims	
  were	
  identified	
  as	
  most	
  effective	
  
Diet/Exercise	
  Method	
  
%	
  Respondents	
  
Evidence	
  
Anaerobic/Aerobic	
  
Exercise	
  

9.4%	
  

Juice	
  Cleanse	
  (2	
  groups)	
  

18.8%	
  

Green	
  Tea	
  (2	
  groups)	
  

9.4%	
  

Liquid/Solid	
  Diet	
  

15.6%	
  

Meditation	
  

6.3%	
  

Eating	
  Speed	
  

18.8%	
  

Fast	
  Food	
  Elimination	
  

6.3%	
  

Combination	
  of	
  Methods	
  

15.6%	
  

“By	
  building	
  muscle	
  and	
  losing	
  fat,	
  you	
  become	
  
healthier	
  and	
  more	
  physically	
  fit.”	
  
“It	
  will	
  increase	
  your	
  endurance	
  and	
  strengthen	
  
your	
  heart	
  and	
  cardiovascular	
  system.”	
  
	
  
“…can	
  rid	
  the	
  body	
  of	
  toxic	
  build-­‐up”	
  
“ingredients	
  are	
  high	
  in	
  antioxidants,	
  vitamins,	
  
and	
  minerals”	
  
	
  
“…acts	
  as	
  an	
  appetite	
  suppressant”	
  
“It’s	
  easy	
  to	
  change	
  and	
  has	
  a	
  lot	
  of	
  benefits.”	
  
“reduces	
  one’s	
  calorie	
  intake”	
  
“This	
  is	
  the	
  only	
  diet	
  to	
  cause	
  measurable	
  
weight	
  loss.”	
  
“The	
  data	
  was	
  reliable.”	
  
“One	
  of	
  the	
  only	
  diets	
  that	
  had	
  data	
  that	
  was	
  
statistically	
  significant.”	
  
“Decreasing	
  stress	
  would	
  be	
  very	
  useful	
  to	
  me.”	
  
“The	
  brain	
  has	
  to	
  send	
  a	
  message	
  to	
  the	
  body	
  to	
  
tell	
  the	
  body	
  that	
  it’s	
  full.”	
  
“The	
  connection	
  of	
  leptin	
  to	
  fullness	
  and	
  that	
  
signal	
  takes	
  time.”	
  
“There	
  are	
  healthier	
  alternatives	
  to	
  fast	
  food.”	
  
“Fast	
  food	
  is	
  full	
  of	
  empty	
  calories.”	
  
“I	
  would	
  vary	
  the	
  types	
  of	
  exercise	
  and	
  eat	
  
slower.	
  This	
  would	
  allow	
  sufficient	
  time	
  for	
  
hunger	
  hormones	
  to	
  tell	
  me	
  to	
  stop	
  eating.”	
  
“I	
  would	
  cleanse	
  my	
  body	
  to	
  get	
  a	
  fresh	
  start.	
  
Anaerobic	
  and	
  aerobic	
  exercise	
  would	
  get	
  my	
  
heart	
  rate	
  up	
  and	
  burn	
  fat.”	
  

29	
  

DISCUSSION	
  
The	
  process	
  of	
  developing	
  deeper	
  conceptual	
  understanding	
  requires	
  students	
  to	
  be	
  
more	
  engaged	
  in	
  their	
  learning	
  and	
  shifting	
  the	
  focus	
  away	
  from	
  the	
  teacher	
  and	
  toward	
  
the	
  student.	
  (Zirbel,	
  2005).	
  In	
  this	
  study,	
  students	
  were	
  expected	
  to	
  demonstrate	
  deeper	
  
understanding	
  of	
  biology	
  concepts	
  by	
  participating	
  in	
  the	
  engagement	
  techniques	
  of	
  
Mastering	
  Biology,	
  ConcepTests,	
  reflective	
  writing,	
  and	
  Project-­‐Based	
  Learning.	
  The	
  data	
  in	
  
Table	
  3	
  shows	
  that	
  students	
  experienced	
  statistically	
  significant	
  gains	
  in	
  all	
  items	
  of	
  the	
  
concept	
  assessment,	
  with	
  an	
  average	
  gain	
  of	
  0.56	
  points	
  for	
  the	
  whole	
  assessment.	
  
However,	
  demonstrating	
  a	
  causal	
  relationship	
  between	
  the	
  engagement	
  techniques	
  and	
  
assessment	
  gains	
  proved	
  difficult.	
  While	
  a	
  majority	
  of	
  students	
  participated	
  in	
  the	
  
engagement	
  components	
  described	
  (Table	
  4),	
  a	
  positive	
  correlation	
  between	
  percent	
  
participation	
  and	
  concept	
  assessment	
  gains	
  could	
  not	
  be	
  observed.	
  For	
  this	
  study,	
  
engagement	
  was	
  defined	
  as	
  participation	
  in	
  classroom	
  activities,	
  but	
  engagement	
  can	
  also	
  
be	
  defined	
  by	
  cognitive,	
  behavioral,	
  and	
  affective	
  indicators	
  (Chapman,	
  2003).	
  	
  
To	
  address	
  the	
  affective	
  aspect	
  of	
  engagement,	
  students	
  participated	
  in	
  discussions	
  
through	
  Peer	
  Instruction	
  and	
  ConcepTests.	
  Eric	
  Mazur	
  was	
  able	
  to	
  demonstrate	
  an	
  
improvement	
  in	
  student	
  performance	
  as	
  measured	
  by	
  a	
  number	
  of	
  different	
  assessments	
  
when	
  PI	
  was	
  implemented	
  in	
  his	
  introductory	
  physics	
  course	
  at	
  Harvard	
  University	
  
(Crouch	
  &	
  Mazur,	
  2001).	
  Due	
  to	
  the	
  lack	
  of	
  a	
  controlled	
  study	
  in	
  this	
  unit	
  plan,	
  a	
  similar	
  
conclusion	
  cannot	
  be	
  reached.	
  	
  
To	
  address	
  the	
  cognitive	
  aspect	
  of	
  engagement,	
  students	
  submitted	
  unit	
  reflections	
  
to	
  demonstrate	
  the	
  ability	
  to	
  make	
  connections	
  between	
  concepts.	
  Writing	
  is	
  a	
  skill	
  that	
  is	
  
generally	
  lacking	
  among	
  college	
  freshman	
  (Conley,	
  2007b),	
  so	
  providing	
  opportunities	
  to	
  

30	
  

write	
  in	
  varied	
  content	
  areas	
  is	
  critical	
  to	
  producing	
  more	
  college-­‐ready	
  students.	
  Among	
  
the	
  three	
  engagement	
  components	
  implemented	
  in	
  this	
  unit,	
  students	
  participated	
  the	
  least	
  
in	
  reflective	
  writing,	
  with	
  an	
  average	
  of	
  73%	
  submitting	
  reflections	
  for	
  the	
  4	
  units	
  defined	
  
in	
  this	
  study	
  (Table	
  4).	
  Writing	
  may	
  be	
  perceived	
  as	
  more	
  time-­‐consuming	
  and	
  not	
  directly	
  
beneficial	
  to	
  understanding	
  content.	
  Unfortunately,	
  a	
  causal	
  relationship	
  between	
  reflective	
  
writing	
  and	
  assessment	
  gains	
  cannot	
  be	
  demonstrated.	
  	
  
Students	
  demonstrated	
  a	
  high	
  degree	
  of	
  success	
  on	
  the	
  PBL	
  assessment,	
  with	
  an	
  
average	
  score	
  of	
  97%	
  (Figure	
  5).	
  The	
  success	
  may	
  be	
  credited	
  to	
  a	
  couple	
  of	
  structures	
  
implemented	
  with	
  this	
  assessment:	
  the	
  long-­‐term	
  nature	
  of	
  the	
  assessment	
  (11	
  weeks	
  to	
  
complete	
  the	
  project,	
  from	
  the	
  day	
  it	
  was	
  introduced	
  to	
  the	
  day	
  it	
  was	
  presented,	
  see	
  Table	
  
1)	
  and	
  the	
  use	
  of	
  feedback	
  protocols	
  to	
  improve	
  student	
  work	
  (Appendix	
  A7).	
  However,	
  it	
  
must	
  be	
  noted	
  that	
  the	
  rubric	
  assessed	
  more	
  than	
  content,	
  with	
  only	
  two	
  of	
  the	
  seven	
  
rubric	
  items	
  assessing	
  content	
  and	
  evidence	
  (Appendix	
  D2).	
  	
  
Although	
  students	
  scored	
  high	
  on	
  the	
  PBL	
  assessment,	
  a	
  concern	
  presented	
  itself	
  
with	
  the	
  PBL	
  reflection	
  responses	
  (Table	
  6).	
  Students	
  were	
  asked	
  to	
  evaluate	
  the	
  claims	
  of	
  
their	
  peers.	
  The	
  exemplar	
  included	
  in	
  Appendix	
  B	
  on	
  anaerobic/aerobic	
  exercise	
  most	
  
effectively	
  answered	
  the	
  driving	
  question,	
  “How	
  do	
  different	
  diet	
  and	
  exercise	
  claims	
  
measure	
  up	
  to	
  addressing	
  the	
  obestiy	
  epidemic”	
  by	
  collecting	
  and	
  analyzing	
  original	
  data	
  
from	
  a	
  large	
  sample	
  size	
  and	
  connecting	
  the	
  data	
  to	
  known	
  information.	
  However,	
  only	
  
9.4%	
  of	
  students	
  reported	
  this	
  claim	
  as	
  the	
  most	
  convincing	
  claim.	
  The	
  highest	
  percentage	
  
of	
  students	
  (18.8%)	
  reported	
  the	
  juice	
  cleanse	
  and	
  eating	
  speed	
  as	
  the	
  best	
  methods	
  for	
  
weight	
  loss	
  or	
  getting	
  in	
  shape.	
  While	
  the	
  reasons	
  for	
  supporting	
  the	
  juice	
  cleanse	
  were	
  
vague	
  and	
  lacking	
  in	
  evidence,	
  the	
  reasons	
  supporting	
  the	
  eating	
  speed	
  were	
  more	
  rooted	
  

31	
  

in	
  valid	
  scientific	
  explanations.	
  Perhaps	
  the	
  reflection	
  prompt	
  did	
  not	
  emphasize	
  the	
  need	
  
to	
  cite	
  evidence	
  clearly	
  enough.	
  Students	
  may	
  also	
  have	
  been	
  swayed	
  by	
  the	
  technological	
  
savvy	
  of	
  some	
  of	
  the	
  presentations	
  and	
  overlooked	
  the	
  lack	
  of	
  evidence.	
  	
  
Despite	
  the	
  ability	
  for	
  many	
  students	
  to	
  cite	
  evidence	
  from	
  the	
  presentations,	
  all	
  
students	
  learned	
  important	
  information	
  from	
  performing	
  the	
  PBL	
  assessment.	
  From	
  the	
  
self-­‐reflection	
  (Table	
  5),	
  most	
  students	
  learned	
  important	
  content	
  relating	
  to	
  metabolism	
  
and	
  diet/exercise	
  claims,	
  but	
  some	
  reported	
  learning	
  important	
  research	
  and	
  collaboration	
  
skills,	
  habits	
  that	
  are	
  indications	
  of	
  college	
  readiness	
  (Conley,	
  2007a).	
  Improvement	
  in	
  the	
  
areas	
  of	
  collaboration	
  and	
  time	
  management	
  is	
  needed	
  for	
  future	
  implementation	
  of	
  this	
  
assessment.	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  

32	
  

FUTURE	
  CONSIDERATIONS	
  
	
  

Engagement	
  is	
  challenging	
  to	
  measure.	
  Participation	
  alone	
  is	
  only	
  part	
  of	
  the	
  

picture;	
  quality	
  of	
  student	
  work	
  and	
  attitude	
  are	
  additional	
  aspects	
  of	
  engagement	
  that	
  are	
  
often	
  subjective	
  (Chapman,	
  2003).	
  One	
  consideration	
  for	
  future	
  implementation	
  of	
  this	
  unit	
  
is	
  to	
  compile	
  survey	
  data	
  evaluating	
  students’	
  attitudes	
  about	
  class	
  activities	
  to	
  determine	
  
which	
  components	
  were	
  deemed	
  most	
  effective	
  and	
  impactful	
  to	
  learning.	
  Another	
  
challenging	
  aspect	
  of	
  this	
  unit	
  was	
  writing	
  effective	
  concept-­‐based	
  questions.	
  Some	
  science	
  
disciplines,	
  notably	
  physics	
  and	
  chemistry,	
  offer	
  concept	
  inventories	
  to	
  assess	
  student	
  
understanding,	
  however,	
  biology	
  lacks	
  such	
  an	
  assessment.	
  In	
  some	
  cases,	
  the	
  wording	
  of	
  
ConcepTest	
  questions	
  caused	
  students	
  to	
  get	
  the	
  incorrect	
  answer.	
  Having	
  a	
  bank	
  of	
  
conceptual	
  questions	
  to	
  draw	
  from	
  might	
  alleviate	
  this	
  problem.	
  Also,	
  the	
  way	
  in	
  which	
  
students	
  responded	
  to	
  ConcepTest	
  questions	
  could	
  be	
  improved.	
  Using	
  smartphones,	
  
clickers,	
  or	
  another	
  electronic	
  data	
  system	
  would	
  provide	
  better	
  tallying	
  of	
  answers	
  and	
  
facilitate	
  better	
  data	
  analysis.	
  	
  
	
  

To	
  address	
  some	
  of	
  the	
  time	
  management	
  and	
  collaboration	
  issues	
  raised	
  by	
  the	
  

PBL	
  self-­‐reflection	
  (Table	
  5),	
  assigning	
  roles	
  in	
  future	
  iterations	
  of	
  this	
  project	
  may	
  be	
  
necessary.	
  Students	
  were	
  asked	
  to	
  submit	
  a	
  team	
  task	
  list	
  (Appendix	
  A6),	
  but	
  this	
  was	
  up	
  to	
  
each	
  team	
  to	
  determine	
  and	
  some	
  students	
  are	
  uncomfortable	
  with	
  delegating	
  
responsibility	
  to	
  their	
  peers.	
  
	
  

Lastly,	
  despite	
  strong	
  efforts,	
  many	
  students	
  value	
  “correctness”	
  over	
  “process”.	
  

When	
  presenting	
  ConcepTest	
  questions,	
  students	
  often	
  wanted	
  to	
  know	
  the	
  correct	
  answer	
  
and	
  not	
  necessarily	
  the	
  metacognitive	
  processes	
  that	
  lead	
  to	
  the	
  correct	
  answer.	
  This	
  is	
  an	
  
attitude	
  that	
  is	
  hard	
  to	
  change,	
  given	
  that	
  is	
  likely	
  stems	
  from	
  very	
  early	
  childhood	
  

33	
  

experiences.	
  However,	
  students	
  must	
  understand	
  their	
  own	
  metacognitive	
  processes	
  in	
  
order	
  to	
  know	
  themselves	
  as	
  thinkers	
  and	
  learners	
  and	
  develop	
  empowerment	
  and	
  the	
  
ability	
  to	
  help	
  oneself.	
  For	
  this	
  reason,	
  the	
  focus	
  in	
  all	
  science	
  classrooms	
  should	
  be	
  on	
  
uncovering	
  the	
  processes	
  of	
  science	
  and	
  reasoning	
  to	
  produce	
  more	
  college	
  and	
  career-­‐
ready	
  students.	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  

34	
  

	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
APPENDICES	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  

35	
  

APPENDIX	
  A:	
  Unit	
  Activities	
  and	
  Components	
  
	
  
APPENDIX	
  A1:	
  PBL	
  Assessment	
  Description	
  

Burn,	
  baby,	
  burn	
  
Investigating	
  diet	
  and	
  exercise	
  claims	
  
Objectives:	
  
•
•

•
•
•
•

Construct	
  explanations	
  of	
  the	
  mechanisms	
  and	
  structural	
  features	
  of	
  cells	
  that	
  allow	
  
organisms	
  to	
  capture,	
  store	
  or	
  use	
  free	
  energy.	
  
Represent	
  graphically	
  or	
  model	
  quantitatively	
  the	
  exchange	
  of	
  molecules	
  between	
  
an	
  organism	
  and	
  its	
  environment,	
  and	
  the	
  subsequent	
  use	
  of	
  these	
  molecules	
  to	
  
build	
  new	
  molecules	
  that	
  facilitate	
  dynamic	
  homeostasis,	
  growth	
  and	
  reproduction.	
  
Analyze	
  data	
  to	
  identify	
  how	
  molecular	
  interactions	
  affect	
  structure	
  and	
  function.	
  
Design	
  a	
  plan	
  for	
  collecting	
  data	
  to	
  answer	
  a	
  particular	
  scientific	
  question.	
  
Evaluate	
  evidence	
  provided	
  by	
  data	
  in	
  relation	
  to	
  a	
  scientific	
  question.	
  
Convey	
  findings	
  to	
  an	
  audience.	
  

Your	
  Task:	
  

As	
  a	
  team,	
  consider	
  the	
  question,	
  “How	
  do	
  different	
  diet	
  and	
  exercise	
  claims	
  measure	
  up	
  to	
  
addressing	
  the	
  obesity	
  epidemic	
  in	
  the	
  U.S.?	
  ”	
  Then,	
  think	
  about	
  the	
  overwhelming	
  
information	
  available	
  regarding	
  specific	
  diet	
  and	
  exercise	
  regimens	
  and	
  supplements	
  
aimed	
  at	
  weight	
  loss,	
  fat	
  loss,	
  increasing	
  muscle	
  mass,	
  etc.	
  Applying	
  your	
  understanding	
  of	
  
how	
  cells	
  generate	
  energy,	
  what	
  nutrients	
  cells	
  require,	
  and	
  how	
  nutrients	
  are	
  transferred	
  
between	
  cells,	
  you	
  will	
  design	
  a	
  procedure	
  for	
  investigating	
  a	
  particular	
  claim.	
  You	
  will	
  
share	
  your	
  results	
  in	
  a	
  research	
  bulletin	
  and	
  present	
  your	
  findings	
  in	
  a	
  creative,	
  engaging	
  
digital	
  format	
  of	
  your	
  choice.	
  Presentations	
  will	
  be	
  posted	
  to	
  a	
  website	
  to	
  be	
  shared	
  with	
  an	
  
online	
  audience	
  and	
  an	
  audience	
  of	
  peers	
  and	
  professionals.	
  

Revisions	
  and	
  Check-­‐ins:	
  

Frequent	
  reviews	
  are	
  an	
  important	
  part	
  of	
  the	
  process	
  of	
  creating	
  a	
  high-­‐quality	
  final	
  
product.	
  You	
  will	
  participate	
  in	
  a	
  minimum	
  of	
  three	
  reviews	
  during	
  the	
  course	
  of	
  the	
  
project.	
  These	
  are	
  the	
  minimum	
  expectations	
  for	
  what	
  you	
  will	
  provide	
  at	
  each	
  review	
  
(Record	
  the	
  due	
  dates	
  next	
  to	
  each	
  revision):	
  
	
  
#1—Charette	
  Protocol	
  with	
  another	
  team	
  	
  
	
  
	
  
Date:	
  ________________	
  
• The	
  beginnings	
  of	
  work	
  samples,	
  such	
  as	
  a	
  rough	
  draft	
  of	
  a	
  report,	
  a	
  storyboard,	
  or	
  a	
  
written	
  record	
  of	
  brainstorming	
  
• An	
  outline	
  of	
  your	
  project	
  
• A	
  task	
  list	
  (shared	
  with	
  teacher)	
  
• A	
  professional	
  example	
  from	
  which	
  you	
  will	
  model	
  your	
  project	
  
• Data	
  and	
  some	
  background	
  research	
  collected	
  

36	
  

	
  
#2—Gallery	
  Walk	
   	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
Date:	
  ________________	
  
• A	
  complete	
  draft	
  of	
  your	
  work	
  (i.e.,	
  a	
  rough	
  cut	
  of	
  a	
  video,	
  draft	
  of	
  an	
  article,	
  
framework	
  of	
  webpage)	
  
• A	
  task	
  list	
  with	
  assignments	
  from	
  team	
  members	
  (shared	
  with	
  teacher)	
  
• A	
  rough	
  draft	
  of	
  research	
  bulletin	
  
• Additional	
  research	
  collected	
  
	
  
#3—Critical	
  Friends	
  Feedback	
  Protocol	
  
	
  
	
  
Date:	
  ________________	
  
• A	
  complete,	
  functioning,	
  revised	
  draft	
  of	
  your	
  work.	
  
• A	
  task	
  list	
  with	
  assignments	
  from	
  team	
  members	
  (shared	
  with	
  teacher)	
  
• A	
  second	
  draft	
  of	
  research	
  bulletin	
  
• Self-­‐reflection	
  completed	
  (submitted	
  to	
  teacher)	
  
	
  
#4—Teacher	
  Conference	
  (optional)	
  
	
  
	
  
Final	
  Project	
  Due:	
  _______________________	
  

	
  
	
  

37	
  

APPENDIX	
  A2:	
  ConcepTest	
  Question	
  Slides	
  
FIGURE	
  6:	
  ConcepTest	
  Questions	
  	
  
This	
  figure	
  displays	
  the	
  23	
  PowerPoint	
  slides	
  used	
  to	
  project	
  ConcepTest	
  questions	
  to	
  the	
  class.	
  
	
  

	
  

	
  
	
  

	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  

38	
  

	
  
	
  

FIGURE	
  6	
  (cont’d)	
  	
  

	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  

	
  
	
  

	
  
	
  
	
  

39	
  

FIGURE	
  6	
  (cont’d)	
  	
  
	
  

	
  

	
  

	
  
	
  

	
  

40	
  

FIGURE	
  6	
  (cont’d)	
  	
  

	
  

	
  

	
  

	
  
	
  

41	
  

FIGURE	
  6	
  (cont’d)	
  

	
  

	
  

	
  

	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  

	
  
	
  

42	
  

FIGURE	
  6	
  (cont’d)	
  	
  
	
  

	
  

	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  

	
  

43	
  

FIGURE	
  6	
  (cont’d)	
  	
  
	
  

	
  

	
  

	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  

	
  
	
  

44	
  

FIGURE	
  6	
  (cont’d)	
  

	
  

	
  

	
  

	
  
	
  

45	
  

FIGURE	
  6	
  (cont’d)	
  	
  

	
  

	
  

	
  

	
  
	
  

46	
  

FIGURE	
  6	
  (cont’d)	
  	
  

	
  

	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  

	
  
	
  

47	
  

APPENDIX	
  A3:	
  Unit	
  Reflection	
  Directions	
  and	
  Rubric	
  

Reflective	
  Writing	
  Post	
  Scoring	
  Guide	
  
	
  

Directions:	
  	
  Your	
  reflective	
  writing	
  post	
  should	
  be	
  approximately	
  500	
  words	
  of	
  text	
  (about	
  
1	
  single-­‐spaced	
  page),	
  although	
  it	
  can	
  be	
  longer	
  if	
  necessary.	
  	
  It	
  should	
  include	
  pictures	
  or	
  
video	
  from	
  class	
  and	
  hyperlinked	
  URL’s	
  to	
  relevant	
  websites	
  or	
  online	
  content	
  that	
  relates	
  
to	
  what	
  we	
  are	
  learning.	
  	
  It	
  should	
  also	
  be	
  written	
  in	
  the	
  first	
  person	
  with	
  correct	
  grammar	
  
and	
  spelling.	
  
	
  

In	
  writing	
  your	
  reflection,	
  consider	
  the	
  following	
  questions	
  to	
  guide	
  your	
  thinking:	
  
● What	
  were	
  the	
  main	
  ideas	
  we	
  learned?	
  
● How	
  do	
  the	
  main	
  ideas	
  connect?	
  
● What	
  were	
  some	
  of	
  the	
  important	
  details	
  to	
  the	
  main	
  ideas?	
  
● What	
  activities	
  or	
  experiments	
  did	
  we	
  do	
  that	
  went	
  along	
  with	
  these	
  ideas?	
  
● How	
  did	
  we	
  come	
  to	
  know	
  and	
  understand	
  the	
  ideas	
  we	
  learned?	
  
● What	
  questions	
  do	
  I	
  still	
  have	
  about	
  what	
  I	
  learned?	
  
● How	
  was	
  my	
  participation	
  in	
  the	
  learning?	
  
● How	
  would	
  I	
  rate	
  my	
  understanding?	
  
● What	
  do	
  I	
  still	
  need	
  to	
  work	
  on	
  more?	
  
TABLE	
  7:	
  Reflective	
  Writing	
  Scoring	
  Rubric	
  

Ratings:	
  

2	
  

General	
  
A	
  post	
  in	
  this	
  category	
  
Description	
   presents	
  a	
  cohesive	
  
piece	
  of	
  writing,	
  a	
  well-­‐
articulated	
  analysis	
  of	
  
the	
  learning	
  that	
  took	
  
place	
  during	
  the	
  unit	
  
with	
  appropriate	
  detail,	
  
and	
  conveys	
  the	
  impact	
  
that	
  the	
  learning	
  had	
  on	
  
the	
  author	
  with	
  
acceptable	
  clarity	
  and	
  
meaning.	
  

1	
  

0	
  

A	
  post	
  in	
  this	
  category	
  
presents	
  an	
  acceptable	
  
analysis	
  of	
  the	
  learning	
  
that	
  took	
  place	
  during	
  
the	
  unit,	
  but	
  lacks	
  
depth	
  in	
  explaining	
  the	
  
impact	
  that	
  the	
  
learning	
  had	
  on	
  the	
  
author.	
  

A	
  post	
  in	
  this	
  category	
  
presents	
  little	
  analysis	
  
of	
  the	
  learning	
  that	
  
took	
  place	
  during	
  the	
  
unit	
  and	
  may	
  only	
  list	
  
the	
  learning	
  activities	
  
without	
  addressing	
  
the	
  impact	
  that	
  the	
  
learning	
  had	
  on	
  the	
  
author.	
  

	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  

48	
  

TABLE	
  7	
  (cont’d)	
  

	
  

2	
  

1	
  

0	
  

Specific	
  
A	
  post	
  in	
  this	
  category	
   A	
  post	
  in	
  this	
  category	
   A	
  post	
  in	
  this	
  category	
  
Elements	
  of	
   exhibits	
  the	
  following:	
   exhibits	
  one	
  or	
  more	
  of	
   exhibits	
  one	
  or	
  more	
  
Reflection	
  
● develops	
  a	
  
the	
  following:	
  
of	
  the	
  following:	
  
detailed	
  
● relies	
  heavily	
  
● provides	
  only	
  a	
  
summary	
  of	
  the	
  
on	
  a	
  description	
  
list	
  of	
  activities	
  
learning	
  that	
  
of	
  what	
  took	
  
that	
  happened	
  
took	
  place	
  with	
  
place	
  in	
  class	
  
during	
  the	
  unit	
  
well-­‐chosen	
  
each	
  day,	
  with	
  
● lacks	
  reflective	
  
examples	
  
few	
  supporting	
  
elements,	
  
● is	
  focused	
  on	
  
examples	
  
including	
  how	
  
how	
  the	
  author	
  
● is	
  vague	
  or	
  
the	
  learning	
  
was	
  changed	
  by	
  
limited	
  in	
  
connects	
  to	
  
the	
  learning	
  that	
  
addressing	
  the	
  
other	
  class	
  
occurred	
  
task	
  of	
  
concepts	
  	
  
● connects	
  ideas	
  
reflecting	
  on	
  
● provides	
  little	
  
together	
  
the	
  learning	
  
or	
  no	
  evidence	
  
● contains	
  one	
  or	
  
● is	
  weak	
  in	
  
of	
  
more	
  embedded	
  
making	
  
understanding	
  
URL’s,	
  photos,	
  or	
  
connections	
  
● contains	
  no	
  
videos	
  
between	
  ideas	
  
embedded	
  URL,	
  
supporting	
  
● may	
  contain	
  an	
  
photo,	
  or	
  video	
  
understanding	
  
embedded	
  URL,	
  
to	
  help	
  support	
  
of	
  concepts	
  
photo,	
  or	
  video	
  
the	
  author’s	
  
● demonstrates	
  
to	
  help	
  support	
  
understanding	
  
strength	
  with	
  
the	
  author’s	
  
● has	
  several	
  
standard	
  
description	
  of	
  
problems	
  in	
  
written	
  English	
  
the	
  learning	
  
language	
  and	
  
and	
  has	
  very	
  few	
  
● contains	
  
sentence	
  
mechanical	
  and	
  
occasional	
  
structure	
  
grammatical	
  
errors	
  in	
  
● post	
  was	
  not	
  
errors	
  
grammar	
  or	
  
submitted	
  
mechanics	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  

	
  

49	
  

APPENDIX	
  A4:	
  Student	
  and	
  Teacher	
  Talk	
  Moves	
  (Socratic	
  dialogue	
  bookmarks)	
  
	
  

Student	
  Talk	
  Moves	
  
-­‐What	
  you	
  just	
  said	
  matches	
  our	
  thinking	
  
because…	
  
	
  
-­‐Why	
  did	
  you	
  say	
  that?	
  Can	
  you	
  explain	
  
your	
  evidence?	
  
	
  
-­‐Could	
  you	
  give	
  me	
  an	
  example?	
  
	
  
-­‐I’m	
  not	
  sure	
  I	
  understand	
  what	
  you	
  are	
  
saying.	
  Could	
  you	
  say	
  it	
  another	
  way?	
  
	
  
-­‐I	
  hear	
  what	
  you	
  are	
  saying	
  but	
  my	
  
evidence	
  said	
  something	
  different…	
  
	
  
-­‐I’d	
  like	
  to	
  add	
  on	
  to	
  what	
  _______________	
  
said.	
  
	
  
-­‐I	
  have	
  evidence	
  of	
  what	
  you	
  just	
  
said_______________________.	
  
	
  
-­‐Another	
  thing	
  we	
  found	
  that	
  goes	
  with	
  
that	
  is…	
  
	
  
-­‐So,	
  are	
  you	
  saying…?	
  
	
  
-­‐Going	
  back	
  to	
  what	
  _________________	
  said	
  
about	
  _____________________...	
  
	
  
Adapted	
  from:	
  
Calkins,	
  Lucy.	
  (2001)	
  The	
  Art	
  of	
  Teaching	
  
Reading.	
  New	
  York,	
  NY:	
  Addison	
  Wesley.	
  

Teacher	
  Talk	
  Moves	
  
-­‐Revoicing	
  (“So	
  let	
  me	
  see	
  if	
  I’ve	
  got	
  your	
  thinking	
  
right.	
  You’re	
  saying…”)	
  
	
  
-­‐Asking	
  students	
  to	
  restate	
  someone	
  else’s	
  
reasoning	
  (“Can	
  you	
  repeat	
  what	
  she	
  just	
  said	
  in	
  
your	
  own	
  words?”)	
  
	
  
-­‐Asking	
  students	
  to	
  apply	
  their	
  own	
  reasoning	
  to	
  
someone	
  else’s	
  reasoning	
  (“Do	
  you	
  agree	
  or	
  
disagree	
  and	
  why?”)	
  
	
  
-­‐Prompting	
  students	
  for	
  further	
  participation	
  
(“Would	
  someone	
  like	
  to	
  add	
  on?”)	
  
	
  
-­‐Asking	
  students	
  to	
  explicate	
  their	
  reasoning	
  
(“Why	
  do	
  you	
  think	
  that?”	
  or	
  “What	
  evidence	
  helped	
  
you	
  arrive	
  at	
  that	
  answer?”)	
  
	
  
-­‐Using	
  wait	
  time	
  (“Take	
  your	
  time…We’ll	
  wait”)	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
Taken	
  from:	
  
Michaels,	
  S.,	
  Shouse,	
  A.W.,	
  Schweingruber,	
  H.A.	
  
(2007)	
  Ready,	
  Set,	
  Science.	
  Washington,	
  D.C.:	
  The	
  
National	
  Academies	
  Press.	
  

	
  

	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  

50	
  

APPENDIX	
  A5:	
  	
  
TABLE	
  8:	
  PBL	
  Student	
  Project	
  Proposals	
  
What	
  will	
  be	
  
What	
  is	
  your	
   Who	
  is	
  your	
  
your	
  team’s	
  final	
   method	
  for	
  
audience?	
  
product?	
  
collecting	
  
data?	
  

PowerPoint	
  and	
  
tea	
  cups	
  with	
  
green	
  tea	
  and	
  
labels	
  with	
  our	
  
findings	
  

Understanding	
  
how	
  the	
  digestive	
  
system	
  works	
  and	
  
what	
  the	
  juice	
  
cleanse	
  does	
  for	
  
the	
  body.	
  
We	
  will	
  present	
  
our	
  research	
  
through	
  a	
  
informative	
  and	
  
engaging	
  
infomercial	
  

Poster	
  and	
  radio	
  
broadcast	
  

We	
  will	
  
analyze	
  
someone	
  
else's	
  data,	
  
and	
  we	
  could	
  
use	
  human	
  
test	
  subjects,	
  
such	
  as	
  having	
  
a	
  group	
  of	
  
people	
  drink	
  
16oz	
  of	
  green	
  
tea	
  a	
  day	
  (this	
  
could	
  prove	
  
problematic	
  
Conducting	
  
our	
  own	
  
experiment	
  
	
  

General	
  
public	
  
(overweight	
  
people	
  and	
  
health	
  
department)	
  
	
  

People	
  
looking	
  to	
  
lose	
  weight	
  
	
  

We	
  will	
  collate	
  
and	
  analyze	
  
outside	
  
research.	
  
	
  

Our	
  audience	
  
is	
  composed	
  
of	
  people	
  
interested	
  in	
  
a	
  convenient	
  
and	
  
rewarding	
  
method	
  of	
  
weight	
  loss	
  
	
  
A	
  combination	
   American	
  
of	
  both	
  	
  
teenagers	
  
	
  
	
  

	
  	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  

51	
  

What	
  materials	
  
will	
  you	
  need?	
  List	
  
any	
  and	
  all	
  
necessary	
  
materials,	
  
including	
  
technology	
  needs.	
  
green	
  tea,	
  
computers,	
  paper,	
  
people,	
  ourselves,	
  
cups,	
  printer,	
  
brains,	
  time,	
  wifi,	
  
tape	
  
	
  

What	
  is	
  your	
  
research	
  
question?	
  

-­‐Juice	
  clense	
  
-­‐Human	
  subjects	
  
	
  

How	
  does	
  the	
  
combination	
  of	
  
food	
  in	
  the	
  juice	
  
clense	
  affect	
  the	
  
body?	
  
	
  
How	
  does	
  
meditation	
  
affect	
  weight	
  
loss.	
  
	
  

Computers	
  for	
  
research,	
  video	
  
taking	
  devices,	
  
actors,	
  props.	
  
	
  

Poster,	
  Computer	
  
for	
  broadcast,	
  
camera,	
  lab	
  
equipment,	
  food	
  	
  
	
  

What	
  is	
  the	
  
effect	
  of	
  green	
  
tea	
  on	
  weight	
  
loss	
  and	
  
maintenance?	
  
	
  

How	
  does	
  the	
  
distribution	
  of	
  
consumption	
  
throughout	
  the	
  
day	
  affect	
  
weight	
  loss?	
  
	
  

TABLE	
  8	
  (cont’d)	
  
	
  
What	
  will	
  be	
  
What	
  is	
  your	
  
your	
  team’s	
  final	
   method	
  for	
  
product?	
  
collecting	
  data?	
  

10-­‐15	
  minute	
  
intervals	
  and	
  
measure	
  heart	
  
rate.	
  Separating	
  
male	
  and	
  female	
  

PowerPoint	
  

Using	
  a	
  timer	
  to	
  
measure	
  exercise	
  
time,	
  then	
  
recording	
  heart	
  
rate	
  on	
  a	
  chart	
  
that	
  separates	
  
male	
  and	
  female.	
  
	
  
research	
  existing	
  
studies	
  
	
  

Who	
  is	
  your	
  
audience?	
  

What	
  materials	
  
will	
  you	
  need?	
  
List	
  any	
  and	
  all	
  
necessary	
  
materials,	
  
including	
  
technology	
  
needs.	
  
Athletes,Trainers,	
   Timer	
  
and	
  coaches	
  	
  	
  
Human	
  
	
  
participates	
  
Data	
  table	
  
Computer	
  
IMovie	
  
Camera	
  
	
  
general	
  public	
  
computers	
  
	
  
	
  

	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  

	
  

52	
  

What	
  is	
  your	
  
research	
  
question?	
  

What	
  are	
  the	
  
differences	
  in	
  
one's	
  heart	
  rate	
  
during	
  anaerobic	
  
and	
  aerobic	
  
exercise?	
  	
  	
  
	
  
What	
  are	
  the	
  
effects	
  of	
  a	
  liquid-­‐
only	
  diet	
  vs	
  a	
  
liquid/solid	
  food	
  
combined	
  diet	
  
and	
  do	
  either	
  of	
  
them	
  result?	
  
	
  

APPENDIX	
  A6:	
  PBL	
  Team	
  Task	
  List	
  

P R O J E C T
Project Name:

M A N A G E M E N T L O G :
T A S K S G U I D E

T E A M

Team Members:

	
  
Who	
  Is	
  
Responsible	
  

Task	
  

	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  

Due	
  
Date	
  

Status	
  

Done	
  

	
  

	
  

	
  

£	
  

	
  

	
  

	
  

£	
  

	
  

	
  

	
  

£	
  

	
  

	
  

	
  

£	
  

	
  

	
  

	
  

£	
  

	
  

	
  

	
  

£	
  

	
  

	
  

	
  

£	
  

	
  

	
  

	
  

£	
  

	
  

	
  

	
  

£	
  

	
  

	
  

	
  

£	
  

	
  

	
  

	
  

£	
  

	
  

	
  

	
  

£	
  

	
  

	
  

	
  

£	
  

	
  

	
  

	
  

£	
  

	
  

	
  

	
  

£	
  

	
  

	
  

	
  

£	
  

	
  

	
  

	
  

£	
  

	
  

53	
  

APPENDIX	
  A7:	
  PBL	
  Project	
  Feedback	
  Protocols	
  

	
  

Feedback	
  Protocols	
  for	
  Reviewing	
  Student	
  Work	
  
	
  

Charette	
  Protocol	
  
TABLE	
  9:	
  Charette	
  Protocol	
  Directions	
  and	
  Timing	
  Guidelines	
  

PRESENTATION	
  
Presenter	
  presents	
  his/her	
  work	
  idea	
  to	
  a	
  partner.	
  The	
  partner	
  listens.	
  

3	
  minutes	
  

FRAMING	
  QUESTION	
  
Presenter	
  asks	
  a	
  specific	
  question	
  to	
  frame	
  the	
  feedback.	
  
e.g.	
  “What	
  can	
  I	
  make	
  better	
  about…?”	
  How	
  can	
  I	
  improve…?”	
  

1	
  minute	
  

FEEDBACK	
  
Partner	
  gives	
  suggestions.	
  Presenter	
  listens.	
  
Make	
  sure	
  your	
  feedback	
  is	
  helpful,	
  specific,	
  and	
  kind.	
  

2	
  minutes	
  

OPEN	
  DISCUSSION	
  
Presenter	
  and	
  partner	
  have	
  a	
  dialogue	
  about	
  the	
  suggestions/feedback.	
  

2	
  minutes	
  

TOTAL	
   8	
  minutes	
  
	
  

Gallery	
  Walk	
  
TABLE	
  10:	
  Gallery	
  Walk	
  Protocol	
  Directions	
  and	
  Timing	
  Guidelines	
  

SET-­‐UP	
  
Hang	
  posters	
  and	
  distribute	
  sticky	
  notes	
  

3	
  minutes	
  

GALLERY	
  WALK	
  &	
  FEEDBACK	
  
Silently	
  record	
  feedback	
  on	
  sticky	
  notes.	
  Offer	
  one	
  or	
  more	
  of	
  the	
  
following:	
  
● Praise-­‐-­‐Tell	
  why	
  you	
  like	
  it;	
  why	
  it	
  is	
  a	
  strength	
  
● Question-­‐-­‐Ask	
  questions	
  about	
  pieces	
  of	
  the	
  work	
  that	
  are	
  unclear	
  
● Polish-­‐-­‐Provide	
  suggestions	
  for	
  improvement	
  
Make	
  sure	
  your	
  feedback	
  is	
  helpful,	
  specific,	
  and	
  kind.	
  

20	
  minutes	
  

REFLECTION	
  
Reflect	
  on	
  the	
  feedback	
  and	
  discuss	
  the	
  Gallery	
  Walk.	
  

5	
  minutes	
  

REVISION	
  
Using	
  the	
  feedback	
  you	
  received,	
  make	
  necessary	
  edits	
  to	
  your	
  work.	
  

	
  

TOTAL	
   28	
  minutes	
  

54	
  

Critical	
  Friends	
  Protocol	
  
TABLE	
  11:	
  Critical	
  Friends	
  Protocol	
  Directions	
  and	
  Timing	
  Guidelines	
  

PRESENTATION	
  
Presenters	
  explain	
  their	
  project;	
  Audience	
  listens	
  

5	
  minutes	
  

CLARIFICATION	
  
Audience	
  asks	
  short	
  clarifying	
  questions;	
  Presenters	
  respond	
  

2	
  minutes	
  

ASSESSMENT	
  
Audience	
  quietly	
  uses	
  rubric	
  to	
  assess	
  the	
  project;	
  Presenters	
  wait	
  

1	
  minute	
  

“I	
  LIKE…”	
  
Audience	
  shares	
  what	
  they	
  liked	
  about	
  the	
  project;	
  Presenters	
  listen	
  

3	
  minutes	
  

“I	
  WONDER…”	
  
Audience	
  shares	
  concerns;	
  Presenters	
  listen	
  

3	
  minutes	
  

REFLECTION	
  
Presenters	
  reflect	
  on	
  useful	
  feedback;	
  Audience	
  listens	
  

3	
  minutes	
  

“I	
  HAVE…”	
  
Audience	
  shares	
  ideas	
  &	
  resources	
  for	
  the	
  project;	
  Presenters	
  may	
  
respond	
  

3	
  minutes	
  

TOTAL	
  
	
  

	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  

	
  
	
  

55	
  

20	
  minutes	
  

APPENDIX	
  A8:	
  PBL	
  Project	
  Presentation	
  Reflection	
  
	
  

BURN,	
  BABY,	
  BURN	
  PROJECT	
  REFLECTION	
  
	
  

After	
  viewing	
  and	
  listening	
  to	
  your	
  peers’	
  projects,	
  respond	
  to	
  the	
  following	
  
question.	
  Use	
  the	
  reverse	
  side	
  of	
  this	
  page	
  to	
  record	
  notes	
  on	
  the	
  presentations.	
  
	
  
1. If	
  you	
  were	
  in	
  a	
  position	
  to	
  lose	
  weight	
  or	
  get	
  in	
  shape,	
  which	
  method	
  that	
  you	
  heard	
  
about	
  would	
  you	
  try	
  &	
  why?	
  Please	
  refer	
  to	
  specific	
  evidence	
  presented.	
  
_________________________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________________________	
  
_________________________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________________________	
  
_________________________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________________________	
  
_________________________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________________________	
  
_________________________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________________________	
  
_________________________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________________________	
  
_________________________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________________________	
  
_________________________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________________________	
  
_________________________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________________________	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  

56	
  

	
  

Topic	
  

Notes	
  

	
  

	
  

	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  

	
  

	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  

	
  

	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  

	
  

	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  

	
  

	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  

	
  

	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  

	
  

	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  

57	
  

APPENDIX	
  A9:	
  Science	
  Writing	
  Heuristic	
  (SWH)	
  Scoring	
  Rubric	
  
Science Writing Heuristic

Q

Title and Authors:
1 Point
Beginning Questions:
What do you have to investigate or figure out about this concept?
What will be the main questions that will guide your learning?

2 Points
Hypothesis:
Considering what you already know about this concept, write a cause and effect statement that explains what
you anticipate will occur.
If …………. then…………. due to…………. (Must show cause and effect and should explain why you believe
this will occur.)

2 Points
Tests:
What tests or procedures will I follow to help answer my questions? (Must include materials, safety, and
procedures.)
What are the independent and dependent variables? What are the control and the constants to ensure test
validity?

10 Points
Observations:
Observations (qualitative and quantitative) that occurred during the lab should be recorded using
appropriate tables, graphs, and statistical analyses.

15 Points
Claims:
State your claim based on your evidence (data collected from observations).
What do you claim to be true?
In this investigation…

Evidence: This is where you use your data to back up the claim you made.
This involves analyzing your tables and graphs.
How can you prove what you are stating? (Back it up)
The claim that when ………, then ……….. (happens)

Refer back to your hypothesis:
The hypothesis was supported/unsupported because…
What procedural changes could you make if you were to repeat the experiment? What follow-up
studies could be done?

15	
  Points	
  

58	
  

	
  
Negotiate: What do others say about my claim?
Internal Sources:

External Sources:

In this section you compare your data with
your classmates. Make sure that you include
any examples that may make your ideas clear.

In this section you compare your data with other
scientists. Use articles, books, or the internet.
Below is an example to cite your sources (APA
style):
EXAMPLE:
Harris, Robert. "Evaluating Internet Research
Sources."
VirtualSalt. 15 June
2008. Web. 20 Apr. 2009.
<http://www.virtualsalt.com/evalu8it.htm>.

5 Points
5 Points

Reflection: How have my ideas changed?
What did you learn about this concept?
How can you connect this learning to something outside of the classroom?
Are there any new questions you have about the concept?

● Your thoughts after the experiment (Understandings, Related Thinking, Connections)
After conducting this experiment it is ………

●

How has your thinking changed based on internal and external sources?
This concept is similar to….. because….
The evidence shows that …………. to be true…………… and not ……………..because this is
what occurred.

10 Points
Total: ______________/65 Points

59	
  

APPENDIX	
  A10:	
  PBL	
  Self-­‐Reflection	
  

SELF-REFLECTION ON PROJECT WORK
Think about what you did in this project and how well the project went. Record
your comments in the right column.
Student Name:
Project Name:
Was this project
interesting to
you? Why or
why not?
What is the
most important
thing you
learned in this
project?
What do you
wish you had
spent more time
on or done
differently?
On what part of
the project did
you do your
best work?

Collaboration:
How well did
your group
collaborate?
Explain.
How well did
your team make
use of time?
Explain.

60	
  

APPENDIX	
  B:	
  First	
  Student	
  PBL	
  Research	
  Report	
  Exemplar	
  
	
  

Anaerobic vs. Aerobic Exercise	
  
Abstract:
All sorts of exercise exist in today’s society. However they all can fall under two categories:
aerobic and anaerobic exercise. As obesity is becoming an evermore-present problem, many
people are increasing health awareness, especially physical wellness. Moreover, our society is
obsessed with efficiency and therefore it would only make sense for us to determine the least
time consuming, yet most physically vigorous activity. In this experiment, the change in heart
rate of participants after exercising is used as an indicator for vigor of an exercise (aerobic or
anaerobic). After review of data we find out that any correlations are insignificant. Therefore,
neither anaerobic nor aerobic exercise is more vigor than the other or more efficient than the
other. To battle this country’s obesity, it’s important to exercise, anaerobically or aerobically.
There are many benefits in performing both types of exercises because each uses different groups
of muscles.
Question:
Does anaerobic or aerobic exercise work a heart harder?
Variables:
● Independent Variables: anaerobic and aerobic exercise
● Dependent Variables: heart rate
● Controlled Variables: Duration of time they exercise, duration of time they take their
heart rate, static data
Null Hypothesis:
Neither anaerobic nor aerobic exercise will affect the heart any differently.
Alternative Hypothesis:
Anaerobic exercise will result in a higher heart rate and therefore will work the heart
harder resulting in a more effective form of exercise.
Research Plan:
There are all styles of exercise. For some toddlers, a game of tag will suffice, some
elderly continue to ballroom dance, or some teenagers go for 6-mile runs. Whatever it may be,
there are two main types of exercise: aerobic and anaerobic. According to the Harvard Medical
School, “aerobic exercise is muscle movement that uses oxygen to burn both carbohydrates and
fats to produce energy, while anaerobic exercise is muscle movement that does not require

61	
  

oxygen and only burns carbohydrates to produce energy”. In simpler terms, anaerobic exercise,
due to the fact that it is exercise done with a substantial oxygen deficit, it can only be done in
short bursts. The intensity of the exercise causes the body to have to perform the exercise with
low oxygen levels, as oxygen cannot be delivered fast enough to the muscles. On the other hand,
aerobic exercise is able to be performed over long periods of time, as the intensity of the activity
is lower, which allows oxygen time to get to your muscles to provide the energy necessary to
perform the task. Aerobic exercise works to mainly improve cardiovascular health, while
anaerobic exercise mainly focuses on improving strength in the large muscle groups in the body,
such as the quadriceps and hamstrings. Therefore certain sports such as cross-country or
swimming would be considered aerobic whereas weight lifting and sprinting would be
considered anaerobic.
Most people exercise to push themselves and make their bodies healthier. Would a
certain type of exercise, aerobic or anaerobic work your body harder? This experiment has been
designed in order to test the relationship between how hard a person is working, based off of the
change from their resting heart rate to their active heart rate, and the type of exercise they are
performing (aerobic vs. anaerobic). Resting heart rate is defined as the beats per minute while a
person is completely at rest (no motion).
Weight loss typically takes place with an increase in metabolism. Metabolism, or the
number of calories the body burns, can be increased due to exercise. Increasing metabolism by
exercising daily increases the number of calories that need to be taken in every day. Metabolism
is like a balance: if calorie intake equals calorie expenditure, than weight remains constant.
However, if calorie intake is lower than calorie expenditure, weight loss will occur. Metabolism
can be increased in two different ways: increasing muscle mass, or increasing heart rate, which is
the focus of this study. While dietary supplements can be used to increase heart rate, they do so
in an artificial way that is often bad for the body. By increasing heart rate in a healthy way such
as performing exercise, weight loss can be achieved.
It is harder for the body to perform an activity without the use of oxygen and therefore
anaerobic activities are typically associated with more intense activities (activities that will work
the heart harder and lead to greater fitness/weight loss). The body needs oxygen for cellular
respiration in order to break glucose and oxygen into ATP, the body’s usable form of energy.
Thus, the body has more energy quickly available for aerobic exercises. Expected results include
greater changes in heart rates for those performing anaerobic exercise versus those doing aerobic
exercises.
Materials:
● Human Participants
● Human Informed Consent Forms
● Stopwatch
● Computer
● Camera
● Data tables to record results

62	
  

● Pencil/pen
Procedures:
● Inform all participants of the purpose of this experiment, our methods, the risks, the
benefits, and their protection of privacy. Obtain their verbal consent.
Aerobic exercise
● Request that each participant perform a type of aerobic exercise, either long distance
running or playing soccer for 5 minutes at their typical work rate.
Soccer
★ Have each participant take their own pulse at their carotid artery in their neck for 30
seconds.
★ Multiply this number by two, and record it in the data table to get their resting heart rate
in beats per minute
★ Have the participants play soccer for 5 minutes without any breaks
★ When finished, have each participant take their own pulse at their carotid artery in their
neck for 30 seconds.
★ Multiply this number by two, and record it in the data table to get their heart rate in beats
per minute.
Long Distance Running
★ Have each participant take their own pulse at their carotid artery in their neck for 30
seconds.
★ Multiply this number by two, and record it in the data table to get their resting heart rate
in beats per minute.
★ Have each participant run around a track for 5 minutes without stopping.
★ When finished, have each participant take their own pulse at their carotid artery in their
neck for 30 seconds.
★ Multiply this number by two, and record it in the data table to get their heart rate in beats
per minute.
Anaerobic exercise
● Request that each participant perform a type of anaerobic exercise, either swing dancing
or doing jumping jacks for 5 minutes at their typical work rate.
Jumping Jacks
★ Have each participant take their own pulse at their carotid artery in their neck for 30
seconds.
★ Multiply this number by two, and record it in the data table to get their resting heart rate
in beats per minute.
★ Have each participant do jumping jacks for 5 minutes without stopping.
★ When finished, have each participant take their own pulse at their carotid artery in their
neck for 30 seconds.

63	
  

★ Multiply this number by two, and record it in the data table to get their heart rate in beats
per minute.
Swing-dancing
★ Have each participant take their own pulse at their carotid artery in their neck for 30
seconds.
★ Multiply this number by two, and record it in the data table to get their resting heart rate
in beats per minute.
★ Request participants to swing dance for about 2 songs (a total of 5 min.).
★ After 5 minutes, have each participant take their own pulse at their carotid artery in their
neck for 30 seconds.
★ Multiply this number by two, and record it in the data table to get their heart rate in beats
per minute.
Human Participants Research:
● Participants: People of any gender, age, ethnicity, physical and health condition will
participate in this experiment.
● Recruitment: Ask peers, friends, and family to participate.
● Methods: Subjects will be asked to give up, at the most, 10 minutes to participate in this
experiment. They must be comfortable with exercising, being videotaped, and getting
their heart rate anonymously recorded.
● Risks: Extended periods of exercise may cause fatigue.
● Benefits: Subjects will be aiding us in the testing on the effect of aerobic and anaerobic
exercise on heart rates.
● Protection of Privacy: Names will not be collected, their data will be plugged into the
table anonymously. If not given consent, they will not be videotaped.
● Informed Consent: We will inform participants on the purpose of the study and the
procedure of the experiment. Their participation is voluntary and they have the right to
stop at any time. By asking each participant to give us their verbal consent, we will
obtain their permission to participate in the experiment.
Data & Analysis:
The following graphs display the change in heart rate (in bpm) for each different exercise for
each gender.
Statistical Analysis:
Mean (of difference between resting and active heart rate):
X=ΣX
n
Aerobic: 65.958 bpm
Anaerobic: 71.388 bpm

64	
  

Variance:
variance=Σ(X-X)2
n-1
Aerobic: 315.913
Anaerobic: 623.497
Standard Deviation:
Standard deviation (S)=

Σ(X-X)2
n-1

Aerobic: 17.774
Anaerobic: 24.970
T-test:
t= |X1-X2|
√1/n(S1)2+(S2)2
t= 0.593
Degree of Freedom:
2(n-1)
Aerobic: dF= 94
Anaerobic: dF= 96
One-Tailed Test:
The alternative hypothesis was directional. We hypothesized that anaerobic exercise would yield
a higher heart rate.
Significance:
P=probability that the difference is due to chance
dF= 94
dF= 96
The t-test value was significantly smaller than any of the columns in the table of P values (1.5).
Therefore, the data is not statistically significant.
Conclusion:
The null hypothesis (neither anaerobic or aerobic exercise will affect the heart any
differently) can be accepted after running t-tests on the data. The slight changes in heart rate
when comparing data for anaerobic and aerobic exercise lead to a t-value of 0.593. For the
specific degrees of freedom for this experiment, 94 and 96, an acceptable t- value would have
been around 1.5 or higher in order for it to be considered statistically significant. This value is
very low compared to 1.5 and therefore the data can be viewed as being insignificant. Therefore,
there is no correlation between the type of exercise (aerobic or anaerobic) and the change in heart
rate (how hard your body worked). Sources of error could include not controlling the experiment
enough. It was not possible to require specific diets for each participant. Participants could have
easily consumed beverages/food that could give a false reading of their heart rate. Another
source of error is the dependence on each participant to be able to correctly take their pulse,
some participants may have reported wrong heart rates due if they didn’t know how to take

65	
  

pulse. One last source of error includes not being able to regulate the temperature. The data for
each activity was taken at different locations with different temperatures (such as playing soccer
outside and doing jumping jacks in class). Places where the temperature was low could lead to
participants having an elevated resting heart rate due to the cold versus the participants indoors.
Although our results lead us to accept the null hypothesis, it wouldn’t hurt to obtain more
participants (get more data), which would increase our degree of freedom and give us more
certainty in our insignificant t-value. Although there isn’t a ‘better’, more ‘efficient’ way to
exercise and reduce obesity, it is still vital to partake in both anaerobic and aerobic activities to
better your health wellness.
Acknowledgements:
A huge thanks to all the participants, family, friends, coaches, and teachers for giving up
their precious time for this experiment. Special thanks to _________________ for running and
doing jumping jacks.

Bibliography:
"Anaerobic Exercise and Heart Rate." LIVESTRONG.COM. LIVESTRONG.COM, 12 Nov.
2013. Web. 18 Nov. 2014. <http://www.livestrong.com/article/371563-anaerobic-exercise-andheart-rate/>.
Bhattacharya, Christina. "Example of Anaerobic Exercise."LIVESTRONG.COM.
LIVESTRONG.COM, 18 Dec. 2013. Web. 18 Nov. 2014.
<http://www.livestrong.com/article/500155-example-of-anaerobic-exercise/>.
"Cellular Respiration." IUPUI Department of Biology. N.p., n.d. Web. 17 Nov. 2014.
<http://www.biology.iupui.edu/biocourses/N100/2k4ch7respirationnotes.html>.
Dale, Patrick. "What Effect Does Aerobic Exercise Have on Muscles?"LIVESTRONG.COM.
LIVESTRONG.COM, 10 Feb. 2011. Web. 18 Nov. 2014.
<http://www.livestrong.com/article/379030-what-effect-does-aerobic-exercise-have-onmuscles/>.
"Increasing Metabolism." Weight Watchers. N.p., n.d. Web. 18 Nov. 2014.
<http://www.weightwatchers.com/util/art/index_art.aspx?tabnum=1&art_id=20801>.

	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  

66	
  

APPENDIX	
  C:	
  Parent	
  Letter	
  and	
  Consent	
  Form	
  
	
  

Parental	
  Consent	
  and	
  Student	
  Assent	
  Form	
  
	
  
Dear	
  Students	
  and	
  Parents/Guardians:	
  
	
  
I	
  would	
  like	
  to	
  take	
  this	
  opportunity	
  to	
  welcome	
  you	
  to	
  AP	
  Biology	
  and	
  invite	
  you	
  to	
  
participate	
  in	
  a	
  research	
  project,	
  Tools	
  for	
  Engagement	
  in	
  Science,	
  which	
  I	
  will	
  conduct	
  as	
  
part	
  of	
  the	
  first	
  trimester	
  of	
  this	
  course.	
  	
  My	
  name	
  is	
  Ms.	
  Dusti	
  Vincent.	
  	
  I	
  am	
  your	
  AP	
  
Biology	
  instructor	
  and	
  I	
  am	
  also	
  a	
  master’s	
  degree	
  student	
  at	
  Michigan	
  State	
  University.	
  	
  
Researchers	
  are	
  required	
  to	
  provide	
  a	
  consent	
  form	
  like	
  this	
  to	
  inform	
  you	
  about	
  the	
  study,	
  
to	
  convey	
  that	
  participation	
  is	
  voluntary,	
  to	
  explain	
  risks	
  and	
  benefits	
  of	
  participation,	
  and	
  
to	
  empower	
  you	
  to	
  make	
  an	
  informed	
  decision.	
  	
  You	
  should	
  feel	
  free	
  to	
  ask	
  the	
  researcher	
  
any	
  questions	
  you	
  may	
  have.	
  
	
  
What	
  is	
  the	
  purpose	
  of	
  this	
  research?	
  	
  I	
  have	
  been	
  working	
  on	
  effective	
  ways	
  to	
  increase	
  
engagement	
  in	
  the	
  classroom	
  and	
  I	
  plan	
  to	
  study	
  the	
  results	
  of	
  this	
  teaching	
  approach	
  on	
  
student	
  comprehension	
  of	
  biological	
  concepts	
  addressed	
  by	
  the	
  AP	
  Biology	
  Framework.	
  	
  
The	
  results	
  of	
  this	
  research	
  will	
  contribute	
  to	
  my	
  understanding	
  of	
  the	
  best	
  approaches	
  to	
  
teaching	
  and	
  assessing	
  science	
  concepts.	
  	
  Completion	
  of	
  this	
  research	
  project	
  will	
  also	
  help	
  
me	
  earn	
  my	
  master’s	
  degree	
  in	
  Michigan	
  State	
  University’s	
  College	
  of	
  Natural	
  Science.	
  
	
  
What	
  will	
  students	
  do?	
  	
  Students	
  will	
  participate	
  in	
  the	
  usual	
  instructional	
  curriculum	
  for	
  
AP	
  Biology,	
  but	
  with	
  added	
  emphasis	
  on	
  increasing	
  engagement.	
  	
  Students	
  will	
  complete	
  
the	
  usual	
  assignments,	
  laboratory	
  experiments	
  and	
  activities,	
  class	
  demonstrations,	
  and	
  
assessments	
  (unit	
  tests,	
  projects)	
  just	
  as	
  they	
  would	
  do	
  for	
  any	
  other	
  unit	
  of	
  instruction.	
  	
  
There	
  are	
  no	
  unique	
  research	
  activities	
  and	
  participation	
  in	
  this	
  study	
  will	
  not	
  increase	
  or	
  
decrease	
  the	
  amount	
  of	
  work	
  that	
  students	
  do.	
  	
  I	
  will	
  simply	
  make	
  copies	
  of	
  student’s	
  work	
  
for	
  research	
  purposes.	
  	
  This	
  project	
  will	
  take	
  place	
  in	
  the	
  first	
  trimester	
  of	
  2014-­‐15.	
  	
  I	
  am	
  
asking	
  for	
  permission	
  from	
  both	
  students	
  and	
  parents/guardians	
  (one	
  parent/guardian	
  is	
  
sufficient)	
  to	
  use	
  copies	
  of	
  student	
  work	
  for	
  my	
  research	
  purposes.	
  
	
  
What	
  are	
  the	
  potential	
  benefits?	
  	
  My	
  reason	
  for	
  doing	
  this	
  research	
  is	
  to	
  learn	
  more	
  
about	
  improving	
  the	
  quality	
  of	
  science	
  instruction.	
  	
  	
  I	
  will	
  not	
  know	
  about	
  the	
  effectiveness	
  
of	
  my	
  teaching	
  methods	
  until	
  I	
  analyze	
  my	
  research	
  results.	
  	
  If	
  the	
  results	
  are	
  positive,	
  I	
  can	
  
apply	
  the	
  same	
  teaching	
  methods	
  to	
  other	
  science	
  topics	
  taught	
  in	
  this	
  course,	
  and	
  you	
  will	
  
benefit	
  by	
  better	
  learning	
  and	
  remembering	
  of	
  course	
  content.	
  	
  I	
  will	
  report	
  the	
  results	
  in	
  
my	
  master’s	
  thesis	
  so	
  that	
  other	
  teachers	
  and	
  students	
  can	
  benefit	
  from	
  my	
  research.	
  	
  	
  
	
  
What	
  are	
  the	
  potential	
  risks?	
  	
  There	
  are	
  no	
  foreseeable	
  risks	
  associated	
  with	
  completing	
  
course	
  assignments,	
  laboratory	
  experiments	
  and	
  activities,	
  class	
  demonstrations,	
  and	
  
assessments.	
  	
  In	
  fact,	
  completing	
  coursework	
  will	
  be	
  very	
  beneficial	
  to	
  students.	
  	
  Another	
  
person	
  will	
  store	
  the	
  consent	
  forms	
  (where	
  you	
  say	
  “yes”	
  or	
  “no”)	
  in	
  a	
  locked	
  file	
  cabinet	
  
that	
  will	
  not	
  be	
  opened	
  until	
  after	
  I	
  have	
  assigned	
  the	
  grades	
  for	
  the	
  trimester.	
  	
  That	
  way	
  I	
  
will	
  not	
  know	
  who	
  agrees	
  to	
  participate	
  in	
  the	
  research	
  until	
  after	
  grades	
  are	
  issued.	
  	
  In	
  the	
  

67	
  

meantime,	
  I	
  will	
  save	
  all	
  written	
  work.	
  	
  Later	
  I	
  will	
  analyze	
  the	
  written	
  work	
  for	
  students	
  
who	
  have	
  agreed	
  to	
  participate	
  in	
  the	
  study	
  and	
  whose	
  parents/guardians	
  have	
  consented.	
  
	
  
How	
  will	
  privacy	
  and	
  confidentiality	
  be	
  protected?	
  	
  Information	
  about	
  you	
  will	
  be	
  
protected	
  to	
  the	
  maximum	
  extent	
  allowable	
  by	
  law.	
  	
  Students’	
  names	
  will	
  not	
  be	
  reported	
  
in	
  my	
  master’s	
  thesis	
  or	
  in	
  any	
  other	
  dissemination	
  of	
  the	
  results	
  of	
  this	
  research.	
  	
  Instead,	
  
the	
  data	
  will	
  consist	
  of	
  class	
  averages	
  and	
  samples	
  of	
  student	
  work	
  that	
  will	
  not	
  include	
  
names.	
  	
  After	
  I	
  analyze	
  the	
  data	
  to	
  determine	
  class	
  averages	
  and	
  choose	
  samples	
  of	
  student	
  
work	
  for	
  presentation	
  in	
  the	
  thesis,	
  I	
  will	
  destroy	
  the	
  copies	
  of	
  students’	
  original	
  
assignments,	
  tests,	
  etc.	
  	
  The	
  only	
  people	
  who	
  will	
  have	
  access	
  to	
  the	
  data	
  are	
  me,	
  my	
  thesis	
  
committee	
  at	
  MSU,	
  and	
  the	
  Institutional	
  Review	
  Board	
  and	
  MSU.	
  	
  The	
  data	
  will	
  be	
  stored	
  on	
  
password-­‐protected	
  computers	
  (during	
  the	
  study)	
  and	
  in	
  locked	
  file	
  cabinets	
  in	
  Dr.	
  
Heidemann’s	
  locked	
  office	
  at	
  MSU	
  (after	
  the	
  study)	
  for	
  at	
  least	
  three	
  years	
  after	
  the	
  study.	
  
	
  
What	
  are	
  your	
  rights	
  to	
  participate,	
  say	
  no,	
  or	
  withdraw?	
  	
  Participation	
  in	
  this	
  research	
  
is	
  completely	
  voluntary.	
  	
  You	
  have	
  the	
  right	
  to	
  say	
  “no.”	
  	
  You	
  may	
  change	
  your	
  mind	
  at	
  any	
  
time	
  and	
  withdraw.	
  	
  If	
  either	
  the	
  student	
  or	
  parent/guardian	
  request	
  to	
  withdraw,	
  the	
  
student’s	
  information	
  will	
  not	
  be	
  used	
  in	
  this	
  study.	
  	
  There	
  are	
  no	
  penalties	
  for	
  saying	
  “no”	
  
or	
  choosing	
  to	
  withdraw.	
  
	
  
Who	
  can	
  you	
  contact	
  with	
  questions	
  and	
  concerns?	
  	
  If	
  you	
  have	
  questions	
  or	
  concerns	
  
about	
  this	
  study,	
  please	
  do	
  not	
  hesitate	
  to	
  contact:	
  
	
  
Ms.	
  Dusti	
  Vincent	
   	
  
	
  
	
  
Dr.	
  Merle	
  Heidemann	
  
Skyline	
  High	
  School	
   	
  
	
  
	
  
118	
  North	
  Kedzie	
  Lab	
  
2552	
  N.	
  Maple	
  Rd.	
   	
  
	
  
	
  
Michigan	
  State	
  University	
  
Ann	
  Arbor,	
  MI	
  48103	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
East	
  Lansing,	
  MI	
  48824	
  
vincentd@aaps.k12.mi.us	
   	
  
	
  
heidma2@msu.edu	
  
(734)	
  994-­‐6515	
  ext.	
  55426	
   	
  
	
  
(517)	
  432-­‐2152	
  ext.	
  107	
  
	
  
If	
  you	
  have	
  questions	
  or	
  concerns	
  regarding	
  your	
  role	
  as	
  a	
  research	
  participant,	
  would	
  like	
  
to	
  obtain	
  information	
  or	
  offer	
  input,	
  or	
  would	
  like	
  to	
  register	
  a	
  complaint	
  about	
  this	
  study,	
  
you	
  may	
  contact,	
  anonymously	
  if	
  desired,	
  MSU	
  Human	
  Research	
  Protection	
  Program	
  at:	
  	
  
irb@msu.edu	
  
	
  
How	
  should	
  I	
  submit	
  this	
  consent	
  form?	
  	
  Please	
  compete	
  the	
  attached	
  form.	
  	
  Both	
  the	
  
student	
  and	
  parent/guardian	
  must	
  sign	
  the	
  form.	
  	
  Please	
  return	
  with	
  your	
  a	
  form	
  indicating	
  
interest	
  either	
  way.	
  	
  Please	
  return	
  this	
  form	
  in	
  a	
  sealed	
  envelope	
  (included)	
  to	
  Ms.	
  
Vincent’s	
  room,	
  B401	
  by	
  Monday	
  8	
  September	
  2014.	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  

68	
  

Parents/guardians	
  should	
  complete	
  this	
  following	
  consent	
  information:	
  
	
  
	
  
I	
  voluntarily	
  agree	
  to	
  have	
  ___________________________________________________	
  participate	
  in	
  this	
  
study.	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
(Student	
  Name)	
  	
  
	
  
Please	
  check	
  all	
  that	
  apply:	
  
	
  
Data:	
  
	
  
__________	
  	
  I	
  give	
  Dusti	
  Vincent	
  permission	
  to	
  use	
  data	
  generated	
  from	
  my	
  child’s	
  work	
  in	
  this	
  
class	
  for	
  her	
  thesis	
  
project.	
  	
  All	
  data	
  shall	
  remain	
  confidential.	
  
	
  
__________	
  	
  I	
  do	
  not	
  wish	
  to	
  have	
  my	
  child’s	
  work	
  used	
  in	
  this	
  thesis	
  project.	
  	
  I	
  acknowledge	
  
that	
  my	
  child’s	
  work	
  will	
  be	
  	
  
graded	
  in	
  the	
  same	
  manner	
  regardless	
  of	
  participation	
  in	
  this	
  research.	
  
	
  
	
  
Photography,	
  audiotaping,	
  or	
  videotaping:	
  
	
  
__________	
  	
  I	
  give	
  Dusti	
  Vincent	
  permission	
  to	
  use	
  photos	
  or	
  videotapes	
  of	
  child	
  in	
  the	
  class	
  
room	
  doing	
  	
  
work	
  related	
  to	
  this	
  thesis	
  project.	
  	
  I	
  understand	
  that	
  my	
  child	
  will	
  not	
  be	
  
identified.	
  
	
  
__________	
  	
  I	
  do	
  not	
  wish	
  to	
  have	
  my	
  child’s	
  images	
  used	
  at	
  any	
  time	
  during	
  this	
  thesis	
  
project.	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
_______________________________________________________________	
   	
  
__________________________	
  
	
  
	
  
(Parent	
  Signature)	
   	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
(Date)	
  
	
  
	
  
_______________________________________________________________	
   	
  
__________________________	
  
	
  
	
  
(Student	
  Signature)	
   	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
(Date)	
  
	
  
	
  
Important:	
  	
  Please	
  return	
  this	
  form	
  in	
  the	
  sealed	
  envelope	
  (included)	
  to	
  Ms.	
  Vincent	
  
in	
  Room	
  B401	
  by	
  Monday	
  8	
  September	
  2014.	
  
	
  
	
  

69	
  

APPENDIX	
  D:	
  Assessment	
  Tools	
  
	
  

APPENDIX	
  D1:	
  Concept	
  Pre-­‐Assessment	
  and	
  Post-­‐Assessment	
  Free-­‐Response	
  Items	
  with	
  
aligned	
  learning	
  objectives	
  

	
  
Pre-­‐test	
  
	
  
Directions:	
  
Respond	
  to	
  each	
  question	
  as	
  completely	
  and	
  honestly	
  as	
  possible.	
  
	
  
1. What	
  characteristics	
  do	
  all	
  prokaryotic	
  and	
  eukaryotic	
  organisms	
  share?	
  (LO	
  2.14)	
  
2. What	
  are	
  the	
  major	
  types	
  of	
  macromolecules	
  and	
  their	
  corresponding	
  functions	
  in	
  
cells?	
  (LO	
  2.8)	
  
3. Describe	
  the	
  structure	
  of	
  the	
  cell	
  membrane	
  and	
  how	
  it	
  assists	
  with	
  moving	
  
materials	
  into	
  and	
  out	
  of	
  cells.	
  (LO	
  2.11)	
  
4. How	
  would	
  a	
  change	
  in	
  the	
  sequence	
  of	
  subunits	
  of	
  a	
  macromolecule	
  affect	
  its	
  
function?	
  (LO	
  4.1)	
  
5. Describe	
  the	
  role	
  of	
  enzymes	
  in	
  cellular	
  reactions.	
  (LO	
  2.1)	
  
6. List	
  as	
  many	
  cellular	
  organelles	
  as	
  you	
  can	
  remember	
  and	
  their	
  corresponding	
  
functions.	
  (LO	
  2.13)	
  
7. Describe	
  how	
  cells	
  obtain	
  energy.	
  (LO	
  2.1)	
  
8. Compare/contrast	
  photosynthesis	
  and	
  cellular	
  respiration	
  in	
  terms	
  of	
  energy	
  and	
  
matter.	
  (LO	
  2.5)	
  
	
  
Scoring	
  Guidelines:	
  
0—No	
  response	
  given	
  or	
  “I	
  don’t	
  know”	
  
1—Explanation	
  is	
  given,	
  but	
  it	
  is	
  incomplete	
  or	
  demonstrates	
  a	
  lack	
  of	
  understanding	
  
2—Explanation	
  is	
  given	
  and	
  demonstrates	
  understanding	
  of	
  concept	
  
	
  
	
  

Post-­‐test	
  
	
  
1. During	
  an	
  investigation	
  of	
  a	
  freshwater	
  lake,	
  an	
  AP	
  Biology	
  student	
  discovers	
  a	
  
previously	
  unknown	
  microscopic	
  organism.	
  Further	
  study	
  shows	
  that	
  the	
  
unicellular	
  organism	
  is	
  eukaryotic.	
  
a. Prokaryotic	
  cells	
  lack	
  membrane-­‐bound	
  organelles	
  found	
  in	
  eukaryotes.	
  
However,	
  prokaryotes	
  must	
  perform	
  many	
  of	
  the	
  same	
  functions	
  as	
  
eukaryotes.	
  Choose	
  THREE	
  organelles	
  found	
  in	
  eukaryotes	
  and	
  explain	
  how	
  
prokaryotic	
  cells	
  carry	
  out	
  the	
  associated	
  functions.	
  (Cells	
  Unit	
  Test	
  long	
  
FRQ,	
  2011	
  FRQ)	
  
2. The	
  drawings	
  below	
  illustrate	
  monomers	
  or	
  polymers	
  of	
  the	
  3	
  types	
  of	
  
macromolecules	
  we	
  studied	
  in	
  this	
  unit.	
  (#21	
  Biochemistry	
  Unit	
  Test)	
  
	
  
	
  

70	
  

FIGURE	
  7:	
  Concept	
  Post-­‐Assessment	
  Macromolecule	
  Structure	
  Diagrams	
  

a. Identify	
  the	
  category	
  of	
  organic	
  molecules	
  to	
  which	
  each	
  molecule	
  belongs	
  

and	
  describe	
  how	
  you	
  identified	
  the	
  molecule.	
  
b. Discuss	
  the	
  biological	
  importance	
  of	
  the	
  organic	
  compounds	
  in	
  relation	
  to	
  
cellular	
  structure	
  and/or	
  function.	
  
3. Membranes	
  are	
  essential	
  components	
  of	
  all	
  cells.	
  
a. Identify	
  THREE	
  macromolecules	
  that	
  are	
  components	
  of	
  the	
  plasma	
  
membrane	
  in	
  a	
  eukaryotic	
  cell	
  and	
  discuss	
  the	
  structure	
  and	
  function	
  of	
  each	
  
in	
  moving	
  materials	
  into	
  and	
  out	
  of	
  cells.	
  (Cells	
  Unit	
  Test	
  short	
  FRQ,	
  2007	
  
FRQ)	
  
4. Question	
  #1:	
  
What	
  happens	
  to	
  the	
  shape	
  and	
  function	
  of	
  a	
  protein	
  if	
  one	
  of	
  the	
  amino	
  acids	
  is	
  
replaced	
  with	
  a	
  different	
  type	
  of	
  amino	
  acid?	
  (#7	
  Biochemistry	
  Unit	
  Test)	
  	
  
a. The	
  protein’s	
  quaternary	
  structure	
  will	
  be	
  damaged.	
  
b. The	
  protein	
  will	
  not	
  change;	
  several	
  amino	
  acids	
  must	
  be	
  altered	
  to	
  have	
  any	
  
effect	
  on	
  protein	
  function.	
  
c. The	
  protein	
  will	
  always	
  denature	
  and	
  become	
  entirely	
  nonfunctional.	
  
d. Depending	
  on	
  the	
  chemical	
  nature	
  of	
  the	
  amino	
  acid,	
  the	
  protein	
  may	
  lose	
  its	
  
function	
  or	
  there	
  may	
  be	
  no	
  measurable	
  effect	
  on	
  the	
  protein’s	
  function	
  	
  
	
  
Question	
  #2:	
  
How	
  might	
  an	
  amino	
  acid	
  change	
  at	
  a	
  site	
  distant	
  from	
  the	
  active	
  site	
  of	
  the	
  enzyme	
  
alter	
  the	
  enzyme’s	
  substrate	
  specificity?	
  (#18	
  Biochemistry	
  Unit	
  Test)	
  
a. by	
  changing	
  the	
  enzyme’s	
  location	
  in	
  the	
  cell	
  
b. by	
  changing	
  the	
  enzyme’s	
  stability	
  
c. by	
  changing	
  the	
  shape	
  of	
  the	
  protein	
  
d. an	
  amino	
  acid	
  change	
  away	
  from	
  the	
  active	
  site	
  cannot	
  alter	
  the	
  enzyme’s	
  
substrate	
  specificity	
  

71	
  

5. Question	
  #1:	
  
Which	
  of	
  the	
  following	
  statements	
  regarding	
  enzymes	
  is	
  true?	
  (#20	
  Biochemistry	
  
Unit	
  Test)	
  
a. Enzymes	
  increase	
  the	
  rate	
  of	
  a	
  reaction	
  by	
  lowering	
  the	
  activation	
  energy	
  
barrier.	
  
b. Enzymes	
  change	
  the	
  equilibrium	
  point	
  of	
  the	
  reactions	
  they	
  catalyze.	
  
c. Enzymes	
  make	
  the	
  rate	
  of	
  a	
  reaction	
  independent	
  of	
  substrate	
  
concentrations.	
  
d. Enzymes	
  increase	
  the	
  rate	
  of	
  a	
  reaction	
  by	
  reducing	
  the	
  rate	
  of	
  reverse	
  
reactions.	
  
Question	
  #2:	
  
According	
  to	
  the	
  induced	
  fit	
  hypothesis	
  of	
  enzyme	
  catalysis,	
  which	
  of	
  the	
  following	
  
is	
  correct?	
  (#16	
  Biochemistry	
  Unit	
  Test)	
  
a. Some	
  enzymes	
  change	
  their	
  structure	
  when	
  activators	
  bind	
  to	
  the	
  enzyme	
  
b. A	
  competitive	
  inhibitor	
  can	
  outcompete	
  the	
  substrate	
  for	
  the	
  active	
  site.	
  
c. The	
  binding	
  of	
  the	
  substrate	
  changes	
  the	
  shape	
  of	
  the	
  enzyme’s	
  active	
  site.	
  
d. The	
  binding	
  of	
  the	
  substrate	
  depends	
  on	
  the	
  shape	
  of	
  the	
  active	
  site.	
  
6. During	
  an	
  investigation	
  of	
  a	
  freshwater	
  lake,	
  an	
  AP	
  Biology	
  student	
  discovers	
  a	
  
previously	
  unknown	
  microscopic	
  organism.	
  Further	
  study	
  shows	
  that	
  the	
  
unicellular	
  organism	
  is	
  eukaryotic.	
  
a. Identify	
  FOUR	
  organelles	
  that	
  should	
  be	
  present	
  in	
  the	
  eukaryotic	
  organism	
  
and	
  describe	
  the	
  function	
  of	
  each	
  organelle.	
  (Cells	
  Unit	
  Test	
  long	
  FRQ,	
  2011	
  
FRQ)	
  
7. Describe	
  how	
  cells	
  obtain	
  energy	
  in	
  the	
  form	
  of	
  ATP.	
  (Cellular	
  Respiration	
  Unit	
  Test	
  
short	
  FRQ)	
  
8. Matter	
  continuously	
  cycles	
  through	
  an	
  ecosystem.	
  A	
  simplified	
  carbon	
  cycle	
  is	
  
depicted	
  below.	
  
	
  
FIGURE	
  8:	
  Concept	
  Post-­‐Assessment	
  Carbon	
  Cycle	
  Diagram	
  

	
  

	
  
a. Identify	
  the	
  key	
  metabolic	
  process	
  for	
  step	
  I,	
  the	
  key	
  metabolic	
  process	
  for	
  
step	
  II,	
  and	
  briefly	
  explain	
  how	
  each	
  process	
  promotes	
  movement	
  of	
  carbon	
  	
  
through	
  the	
  cycle.	
  For	
  each	
  process,	
  your	
  explanation	
  should	
  focus	
  on	
  the	
  
role	
  of	
  energy	
  in	
  the	
  movement	
  of	
  carbon.	
  (Photosynthesis	
  Unit	
  Test	
  short	
  
FRQ,	
  2013	
  Practice	
  exam)	
  

	
  
	
  

72	
  

APPENDIX	
  D2:	
  PBL	
  Assessment	
  Rubric	
  
	
  

Burn,	
  Baby,	
  Burn	
  Final	
  Project	
  Rubric	
  
TABLE	
  12:	
  PBL	
  Project	
  Scoring	
  Rubric	
  
Final	
  unit	
  project	
  rubric	
  to	
  score	
  written	
  and	
  media	
  components	
  

Content

Evidence

Distinguished—2
The team:
• Identifies how
molecular
interactions affect
structure and
function
• Explains the
features and
mechanisms of cells
that allow humans to
capture, store, and
use energy
• Represents the
exchange of
molecules between
a human and its
environment
• Represents the use
of molecules in
metabolism,
homeostasis,
growth, and
development.
• Evidence is
thoughtfully chosen
to answer the
question.
• Evidence is
integrated into the
writing and final
product.
• A variety of data are
represented.
• Evidence is quoted
and managed
thoughtfully.

Mastery—1
3 out 4 of the content
elements from the
“Distinguished”
column are met.

•

•

•

•

	
  
	
  
	
  

73	
  

Some evidence is
thoughtfully
chosen.
Some evidence is
integrated into the
writing and final
product.
Some evidence is
quoted and
managed
thoughtfully.
Evidence is
somewhat varied.

Novice—0
2 or fewer of the
content elements
from the
“Distinguished”
column are met.

•

•

•

•

Little evidence
is thoughtfully
chosen.
Little evidence
is integrated
into the writing
and final
product.
Little evidence
is quoted and
managed
thoughtfully.
Evidence is
not varied.

TABLE	
  12	
  (cont’d)	
  
	
  

Communication •
& Clarity
•

Structure/
Organization

•

•

The thesis fully
addresses the
research question.
The final product
clearly and elegantly
communicates the
message found in
the research.

•

All ideas and
evidence are
logically and
systematically
organized to
develop and
establish the points
of the thesis.
The written structure
clearly supports the
thesis and reflects
professional writing
conventions
(mechanics, usage,
sentence structure).

•

•

•

•

74	
  

The thesis
somewhat
addresses the
question.
The final product
communicates
much of the
message found in
the research.

•

Some ideas and
evidence are
logically and
systematically
organized to
develop and
establish the
points of the
thesis.
The written
structure
somewhat
supports the
thesis.
The written
structure
somewhat reflects
professional
writing
conventions.

•

•

•

The thesis is
incomplete.
The final
product
communicates
little or some
of the
message
found in the
research.
Few ideas and
evidence are
logically and
systematically
organized to
develop and
establish the
points of the
thesis.
The written
structure does
not reflect
professional
writing
conventions.

TABLE	
  12	
  (cont’d)	
  
	
  

Quality of
Craftsmanship
& Use of
Technology

•
•

•

Collaboration

Citations

•

•

•

The final product
•
shows evidence of
drafting & revision.
The media chosen
to convey message
•
is appropriate and
well produced.
The final product is a
complete and high
quality work sample. •

The final product
•
shows some
evidence of
revision.
•
The media used to
convey message
is somewhat
appropriate and
well produced.
The final product
•
is a somewhat
high quality work
sample.

In addition to
meeting the Mastery
criteria, team
members describe:
o challenges to
the group
effort while
completing
the task
o solutions that
were used to
address the
challenges

•

All team members
contribute to the
final product.
All team members
provide
appropriate oral
responses to
audience
questions,
concerns, and
comments.

All evidence is cited
in the appropriate
format.
Citations are
integrated into the
writing and final
product.

•

•

•

	
  
	
  

75	
  

•

•

Some evidence is •
cited in the
appropriate
format.
•
Some citations are
integrated into the
writing and final
product.

The final
product needs
to be revised.
The medium
used is not
appropriate or
produced well
enough to
convey the
message.
The final
product is
incomplete or
a low quality
sample.
Some team
members
contribute to
the final
product or
work is
assigned
unequally.
Some team
members
provide
appropriate
oral responses
to audience
questions,
concerns, and
comments.
Little to no
evidence is
cited.
Little to no
citations are
integrated into
the writing and
final product.

	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
REFERENCES	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  

76	
  

REFERENCES	
  
	
  
	
  
AP	
  Biology	
  Course	
  and	
  Exam	
  Description	
  (1st	
  ed.,	
  Vol.	
  1,	
  p.	
  193).	
  (2012).	
  New	
  York,	
  NY:	
  
College	
  Board.	
  
	
  
Buck	
  Institute	
  for	
  Education	
  (2012).	
  Project	
  Management	
  Log:	
  Team.	
  Retrieved	
  from	
  
http://www.bie.org	
  
	
  
Burke,	
  K.A.,	
  Hand,	
  B.,	
  Poock,	
  J.,	
  &	
  Greenbowe,	
  T.	
  (2005,	
  September).	
  Using	
  the	
  Science	
  
Writing	
  Heuristic:	
  Training	
  Chemistry	
  Teaching	
  Assistants.	
  Journal	
  of	
  College	
  Science	
  
Teaching,	
  35(3).	
  
	
  
Campbell,	
  N.	
  &	
  Reece,	
  J.	
  (2008).	
  Biology.	
  Student	
  ed.	
  (8th	
  ed.	
  AP*	
  ed.).	
  S.l.:	
  
Pearson/Benjamin	
  Cummings.	
  
	
  
Chapman,	
  E.	
  (2003).	
  Alternative	
  approaches	
  to	
  assessing	
  student	
  engagement	
  rates.	
  
Practical	
  Assessment,	
  Research	
  &	
  Evaluation,	
  8(13).	
  Retrieved	
  July	
  1,	
  2014	
  from	
  
http://PAREonline.net/getvn.asp?v+8&n=13.	
  
	
  
Common	
  Core	
  State	
  Standards	
  Initiative	
  (CCSSI).	
  (2015).	
  College	
  and	
  Career	
  Readiness	
  
Anchor	
  Standards	
  for	
  Writing.	
  Retrieved	
  from	
  http://corestandards.org	
  
	
  
Conley,	
  D.	
  T.	
  (2007a).	
  Redefining	
  college	
  readiness.	
  Eugene,	
  OR:	
  Educational	
  Policy	
  
Improvement	
  Center	
  
	
  
Conley,	
  D.T.	
  (2007b).	
  The	
  Challenge	
  of	
  College	
  Readiness.	
  Educational	
  Leadership,	
  64(7),	
  23-­‐
29.	
  
	
  
Crouch,	
  C.H.,	
  &	
  Mazur,	
  E.	
  (2001,	
  September)	
  Peer	
  Instruction:	
  Ten	
  years	
  of	
  experience	
  and	
  
results.	
  American	
  Journal	
  of	
  Physics,	
  69(9),	
  970-­‐977.	
  
	
  
Elbow,	
  P.	
  (1993,	
  February).	
  Ranking,	
  Evaluating,	
  Liking:	
  Sorting	
  Out	
  Three	
  Forms	
  of	
  
Judgement.	
  College	
  English,	
  55(2),	
  187-­‐206.	
  
	
  
Feinstein,	
  N.	
  (2011,	
  January).	
  Salvaging	
  Science	
  Literacy.	
  Science	
  Education,	
  95(1),	
  168-­‐185.	
  
Article	
  first	
  published	
  online	
  September	
  20,	
  2010.	
  
	
  
Grotzer,	
  T.	
  &	
  Bell,	
  B.	
  (1999).	
  Negotiating	
  the	
  funnel:	
  Guiding	
  students	
  toward	
  
understanding	
  elusive	
  generative	
  concepts.	
  In	
  L.	
  Hetland	
  &	
  S.	
  Veenema	
  (Eds.)	
  The	
  Project	
  
Zero	
  classroom:	
  Views	
  on	
  understanding.	
  President	
  and	
  Fellows	
  of	
  Harvard	
  College.	
  
	
  
Hmelo-­‐Silver,	
  C.	
  (2004).	
  Problem-­‐Based	
  Learning:	
  What	
  and	
  How	
  Do	
  Students	
  Learn?	
  
Educational	
  Psychology	
  Review,	
  16(3),	
  235-­‐266.	
  
	
  

77	
  

Larner,	
  J.	
  &	
  Mergendoller,	
  J.	
  (2010).	
  7	
  Essentials	
  for	
  Project-­‐Based	
  Learning.	
  Educational	
  
Leadership,	
  68(1).	
  
	
  
Mazur,	
  E.	
  (1997).	
  Peer	
  Instruction	
  and	
  Motivating	
  Students.	
  Peer	
  Instruction:	
  A	
  User’s	
  
Manual	
  (pp.	
  10-­‐23).	
  Prentice	
  Hall.	
  
	
  
Mazur,	
  E.	
  &	
  Watkins,	
  J.	
  (2009).	
  Using	
  JiTT	
  with	
  Peer	
  Instruction.	
  In	
  Scott	
  Simkins	
  and	
  Mark	
  
Maier	
  (Eds.),	
  Just	
  in	
  Time	
  Teaching	
  Across	
  the	
  Disciplines	
  (pp.	
  39-­‐62).	
  Sterling,	
  VA:	
  Stylus	
  
Publishing.	
  
	
  
Michaels,	
  S.,	
  &	
  Shouse,	
  A.	
  (2008).	
  Ready,	
  set,	
  science!	
  Putting	
  research	
  to	
  work	
  in	
  K-­‐8	
  science	
  
classrooms.	
  Washington,	
  D.C.:	
  national	
  Academies	
  Press.	
  
	
  
Michigan	
  Department	
  of	
  Education	
  (2015).	
  Focus	
  Schools.	
  Retrieved	
  from	
  
http://www.michigan.gov/mde	
  
	
  
Mioduser,	
  D.,	
  &	
  Betzer,	
  N.	
  (2007).	
  The	
  Contribution	
  Of	
  Project-­‐based-­‐learning	
  To	
  High-­‐
achievers’	
  Acquisition	
  Of	
  Technological	
  Knowledge	
  And	
  Skills.	
  International	
  Journal	
  of	
  
Technology	
  and	
  Design	
  Education,	
  18,	
  59-­‐77.	
  
	
  
National	
  Academy	
  of	
  Sciences,	
  National	
  Academy	
  of	
  Engineering,	
  Institute	
  of	
  Medicine,	
  
National	
  Research	
  Council.	
  (2011,	
  July).	
  A	
  Framework	
  for	
  K-­‐12	
  Science	
  Education:	
  Practices,	
  
Crosscutting	
  Concepts,	
  and	
  Core	
  Ideas	
  (Report	
  Brief,	
  Board	
  on	
  Science	
  Education).	
  
	
  
National	
  Governors	
  Association	
  Center	
  for	
  Best	
  Practices	
  (NGA	
  Center)	
  and	
  the	
  Council	
  of	
  
Chief	
  State	
  School	
  Officers	
  (CCSSO).	
  (2010,	
  June).	
  Common	
  Core	
  State	
  Standards	
  for	
  English	
  
Language	
  Arts	
  and	
  Literacy	
  in	
  History/Social	
  Studies,	
  Science,	
  and	
  Technical	
  Subjects.	
  
	
  
National	
  Survey	
  of	
  Student	
  Engagement	
  (NSSE)	
  (2006).	
  Engaged	
  Learning:	
  Fostering	
  
Success	
  for	
  All	
  Students	
  Annual	
  Report.	
  Bloomington,	
  IN	
  
	
  
	
  
Paul,	
  R.,	
  &	
  Binker,	
  A.	
  (2012).	
  Global	
  Strategies:	
  Socratic	
  Questioning	
  &	
  Role-­‐Playing.	
  In	
  
Critical	
  Thinking	
  Handbook:	
  K-­‐3rd	
  Grades	
  A	
  Guide	
  for	
  Remodeling	
  Lesson	
  Plans	
  in	
  Language	
  
Arts,	
  Social	
  Studies,	
  and	
  Science	
  (1st	
  ed.,	
  pp.	
  37-­‐55).	
  Tomales,	
  CA:	
  Foundation	
  for	
  Critical	
  
Thinking	
  Press.	
  
	
  
Schoenbach,	
  R.,	
  Greenleaf,	
  C.,	
  &	
  Murphy,	
  L.	
  (2012).	
  Reading	
  for	
  understanding:	
  How	
  reading	
  
apprenticeship	
  improves	
  disciplinary	
  learning	
  in	
  secondary	
  and	
  college	
  classrooms	
  (Second	
  
ed.).	
  San	
  Francisco,	
  CA:	
  Jossey-­‐Bass,	
  a	
  Wiley	
  imprint.	
  
	
  
	
  
Smith,	
  M.K.,	
  Wood,	
  W.B.,	
  Krauter,	
  K.,	
  &	
  Knight,	
  J.K.	
  (2011).	
  Combining	
  Peer	
  Discussion	
  with	
  
Instructor	
  Explanation	
  Increases	
  Student	
  Learning	
  from	
  In-­‐Class	
  Concept	
  Questions.	
  CBE—
Life	
  Sciences	
  Education,	
  10,	
  55-­‐63.	
  
	
  

78	
  

The	
  weight	
  of	
  the	
  nation	
  [Motion	
  picture	
  trailer].	
  (2012).	
  HBO	
  Home	
  Box	
  Office.	
  
	
  
	
  
Wenning,	
  C.J.	
  (2005,	
  September).	
  Whiteboarding	
  &	
  Socratic	
  dialogues:	
  Questions	
  &	
  
answers.	
  Journal	
  of	
  Physics	
  Teacher	
  Education,	
  3(1),	
  3-­‐10.	
  
	
  
Wolf,	
  D.,	
  Bixby,	
  J.,	
  Glenn	
  III,	
  J.,	
  &	
  Gardner,	
  H.	
  (1991).	
  Chapter	
  2:	
  To	
  Use	
  Their	
  Minds	
  Well:	
  
Investigating	
  New	
  Forms	
  of	
  Student	
  Assessment.	
  In	
  REVIEW	
  OF	
  RESEARCH	
  IN	
  EDUCATION	
  
(1st	
  ed.,	
  Vol.	
  17,	
  pp.	
  31-­‐74).	
  Sage	
  Publications.	
  
	
  
Zirbel,	
  E.L.	
  (2005).	
  Teaching	
  to	
  Promote	
  Understanding	
  and	
  Instigate	
  Conceptual	
  Change.	
  
Science	
  Education	
  Review.	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  

	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  

79