Does the digital need to divide us?

The presence and use of digital devices in our classrooms prompts polarizing discussions and debates among educators. The vast majority of our students carry at least one web-enabled device, providing endless options for distraction of themselves and others. At the same time, applications for this technology also provide the means to support practises known to help learning, such as increasing engagement, providing opportunities for frequent formative/low-stakes feedback, and collaborative/peer learning. Feelings are strong about both the pros and cons of technology in the classroom. Some educators have opted for differing approaches to this issue: some banning laptops, tablets and cell phones in the classroom while others deliberately engage such devices in classroom activities. We will explore the recent literature/evidence relating to the impact of student device use in the classroom, concerns regarding note-taking, and benefits of bring your own device (BYOD) educational technology. Participant discussion will explore approaches that could be used in our own classes, keeping in mind major research findings

Science Education Mythbusters: Challenging the idea of expected grade distributions and “anomalous grades”

As we know with students, unseating misconceptions and deeply held personal myths is a challenging but necessary part of learning. As scientists, we are accustomed to questioning hypotheses and evaluating evidence. However, as science educators, it can be difficult to recognize our own assumptions about teaching/learning, and how they may be affecting our practise.In this session, we will review the literature, weigh the evidence, and discuss misconceptions surrounding grade distributions in science courses. (In a course, is there an expected or ideal grade distribution? An ideal average? Are deviations from expected grade distributions indicative of problems? Are science courses harder than non-science courses, which should be reflected in grade distributions?) Recent cases in Canadian universities have highlighted the controversy surrounding grade distribution policies (Petz, 2010). Approaches to teaching and assessment (and, potentially, tenure and promotion) of science educators may be impacted by university/faculty/departmental grading expectations. A brief overview of the literature will be followed by directed discussion.Possible questions for debate/discussion:1. What are the current practises/policies at our own institutions/departments?2. What effects do the misconceptions have on science students? Faculty members?3. How can improvements in teaching/learning be assessed (i.e., do improvements in grades indicate improved teaching/learning)?4. Is grade inflation actually occurring in science courses? (And, if so, is this a major concern?)5. What strategies are most effective for exploring the topic with colleagues (faculty/TAs)?Reference:Petz, S. 2010. Alberta prof asked to resign over grades dispute. Maclean’s Magazine Blog: http://oncampus.macleans.ca/education/2010/12/31/alberta-prof-asked-to-resign-over-grades-dispute/ Retrieved May 31, 2011

Science Education Mythbusters: Challenging “Learning styles”

As we know with students, unseating misconceptions and deeply held personal myths is a challenging but necessary part of learning. As scientists, we are accustomed to questioning hypotheses and evaluating evidence. However, as science educators, it can be difficult to recognize our own assumptions about teaching/learning, and how they may be affecting our practise. In this session, we review the literature, weigh the evidence, and have a directed discussion of misconceptions surrounding learning styles (i.e., the idea that some students learn significantly better visually vs. kinaesthetically, etc.) This idea is prevalent not only among faculty, but also graduate students and undergraduates, and students may feel that their needs are not being met. However, the concept of preferred learning styles (as defined above) is not supported by empirical research. Possible questions for debate/discussion: 1. What’s the harm in propagating the idea of ‘learning styles’? How does the idea of Learning Styles shape faculty approaches to teaching? Evaluation of teaching for tenure/promotion? Would the time and effort of faculty who try to accommodate preferred learning styles be better put towards more effective strategies known to promote increased student learning? How do these misconceptions shape student expectations and affect student perceptions of teaching (which often surface on evaluations)? 2. What strategies are most effective for exploring the topic with colleagues (faculty/TAs)? Students? Attendees will gain knowledge of the literature surrounding learning styles. As well, attendees will be able to respond to individuals who persist in promoting the idea of learning styles

Videos in STEM courses: A 21st century tool in higher education

The call for actively engaging students in the STEM classroom has increased to a clamour in recent years – in the field of biology, this is reflected through the call for student-centered learning in the 2011 AAAS Vision and Change document (http://visionandchange.org). The flipped classroom is arguably the most student-centered and interactive of the various active learning approaches. Central to this type of course are the instructional videos that students watch before class. While the concept of a flipped class may be of interest to many, the need to create these videos is often the perceived obstacle that prevents adoption of a flipped approach. Outside of the flipped classroom, there are a variety of other uses for instructor-created videos. In this presentation, we will discuss how we have incorporated instructional videos, lecture capture and screencasts in our flipped, blended and non-flipped courses. Participants will learn how simple these videos are to make and disseminate and will hear about the various types and uses of instructional videos. They will have the opportunity to debate the pros and cons of possibly the most controversial of instructional videos: lecture capture. Many dental and medical schools have been recording their lectures for years, yet this practice is not common in STEM education: why? The session will end with participants brainstorming possible uses for their own courses. In a follow-up workshop, we will provide hands-on experience to help participants make their own short instructional videos

Clinical outcomes of treatment with idebenone in Leber's hereditary optic neuropathy in the Netherlands:A national cohort study

Purpose The purpose of the study was to present results from a national Dutch cohort of patients with Leber's Hereditary Optic Neuropathy (LHON) treated with idebenone. Methods The multicentre, open-label, retrospective evaluation of the long-term outcome of idebenone treatment of Dutch LHON patients on visual function and on thickness of the retinal ganglion cell layer. Patients included in the analysis had a confirmed mutation in their mitochondrial DNA encoding either of the seven subunits of complex I, had a reported loss of vision in at least one eye and had a follow-up of more than 6 months after their treatment was started. Control visits involved routine clinical examinations of visual function and retinal structure at (1) the start of treatment, (2) nadir (time of lowest visual acuity), (3) the time of recovery (if any), (4) the time of termination of treatment and (5) more than 6 months after termination of the treatment. Results Data from 72 patients were analysed. Treatment duration was 23.8 +/- 14.4 (mean +/- SD) months. A positive response, that is either a clinically relevant recovery (CRR) or a clinically relevant stabilization (CRS), occurred in 53% and 11% of the patients, respectively. The magnitude of CRR was 0.41 +/- 1.54 logMAR. CRR of visual acuity is associated with recovery of colour discrimination. The thickness of both the ganglion cell complex (GCC) and the retinal nerve fibre layer (RNFL) is irreversibly reduced. Conclusion Our results confirm that idebenone may help to restore or maintain visual function. Whether this effect will persist is still unknown. Thinning of retinal neural tissue appears to be permanent

Factors affecting outcomes of open surgical repair of pararenal aortic aneurysms: A 10-year experience

PurposeFew large series document surgical outcomes for patients with pararenal abdominal aortic aneurysms (PAAAs), defined as aneurysms including the juxtarenal aorta or renal artery origins that require suprarenal aortic clamping. No standard endovascular alternatives presently exist; however, future endovascular branch graft repairs ultimately must be compared with the gold standard of open repair. To this end, we present a 10-year experience.MethodsBetween 1993 and 2003, 3058 AAAs were repaired. Perioperative variables, morbidity, and mortality were retrospectively assessed. Renal insufficiency was defined as a rise in the concentration of serum creatinine by ≥0.5 mg/dL. Factors predicting complications were identified by multivariate analyses. Morbidity and 30-day mortality were evaluated with multiple logistic regression analysis.ResultsOf a total of 3058 AAA repairs performed, 247 were PAAAs (8%). Mean renal ischemia time was 23 minutes (range, 5 to 60 minutes). Cardiac complications occurred in 32 patients (13%), pulmonary complications in 38 (16%), and renal insufficiency in 54 (22%). Multivariate analysis associated myocardial infarction with advanced age (P = .01) and abnormal preoperative serum creatinine (>1.5 mg/dL) (P = .08). Pulmonary complications were associated with advanced age (P = .03), renal artery bypass (P = .02), increased mesenteric ischemic time (P = .01), suprarenal aneurysm repair (P < .0008), and left renal vein division (P = .01). Renal insufficiency was associated with increased mesenteric ischemic time (P = .001), supravisceral clamping (P = .04), left renal vein division (P = .04), and renal artery bypass (P = .0002), but not renal artery reimplantation or endarterectomy. New dialysis was required in 3.7% (9/242). Abnormal preoperative serum creatinine (>1.5 mg/dL) was predictive of the need for postoperative dialysis (10% vs 2%; P = .04). Patients with normal preoperative renal function had improved recovery (93% vs 36%; P = .0002). The 30-day surgical mortality was 2.5% (6/247) but was not predicted by any factors, and in-hospital mortality was 2.8% (7/247). Median intensive care and hospital stays were 3 and 9 days, respectively, and longer stays were associated with age at surgery (P = .007 and P = .0002, respectively) and any postoperative complication.ConclusionsPAAA repair can be performed with low mortality. Renal insufficiency is the most frequent complication, but avoiding renal artery bypass, prolonged mesenteric ischemia time, or left renal vein transection may improve results

Short screening tools for risky drinking in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians : Modified AUDIT-C and a new approach

Background Alcohol consumption among Indigenous Australians can involve a stop-start pattern of drinking, with consumption well above recommended guidelines on each occasion. Such intermittent drinking patterns can make screening for risky drinking difficult. This study evaluates the ability of several short alcohol screening tools, contained in the Grog Survey Application, to detect short- or long-term risky drinking as defined by Australian guidelines. Tested tools include a modification of Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test-Consumption (AUDIT-Cm). Methods Alcohol consumption was assessed in current drinkers in the past year (n = 184) using AUDIT-Cm and using the last four drinking occasions (Finnish method). Sensitivity and specificity were assessed relative to the Finnish method, for how AUDIT-Cm score (3 + for women, 4 + for men), and how subsets of AUDIT-Cm questions (AUDIT-1m and AUDIT-2m; and AUDIT-3mV alone) were able to determine short- or long-term risk from drinking. Responses to AUDIT-Cm were used to calculate the average standard drinks consumed per day, and the frequency at which more than four standard drinks were consumed on single occasions. Finally, shorter versions of the Finnish method (1, 2, or 3 occasions of drinking) were compared to the full Finnish method, by examining the percentage of variance retained by shorter versions. Results AUDIT-Cm has a high sensitivity in detecting at-risk drinking compared with the Finnish method (sensitivity = 99%, specificity = 67%). The combination of AUDIT-1m and AUDIT-2m was able to classify the drinking risk status for all but four individuals in the same way as the Finnish method did. For the Finnish method, two drinking sessions to calculate drinks per drinking occasion, and four to calculate frequency resulted in nearly identical estimates to data on all four of the most recent drinking occasions (r2 = 0.997). Conclusions The combination of AUDIT-1m and AUDIT-2m may offer advantages as a short screening tool, over AUDIT-3mV, in groups where intermittent and high per occasion drinking is common. As an alternative to the full Finnish method, the quantity consumed on the last two occasions and timing of the last four occasions may provide a practical short screening tool

More Connecting with Less Boundaries: The Ontario Consortium of Undergraduate Biology Educators (oCUBE) Model

Founded in 2009, the Ontario Consortium of Undergraduate Biology Educators (oCUBE) is an enthusiastic community of practice dedicated to enhancing the quality and experience of undergraduate biology education within Ontario universities. This consortium has grown since its inception and now supports knowledge mobilization between educators across 17 Ontario universities and colleges. Educators from diverse fields share best practices related to teaching and learning, discuss common issues such as curriculum innovation, provide supportive mentorship for new, future, and experienced faculty, and collaborate on research projects. Communication occurs via monthly online conferencing meetings, a wiki website, monthly newsletters, one-on-one interactions, and an annual UnConference (1,2). In this workshop, participants will experience the interactive UnConference format that oCUBE uses to facilitate our meetings. We will then engage the participants in an interactive simulation of the oCUBE UnConference model by inviting them to provide and select topics/questions for potential discussion , facilitate brief sessions, and scribe outcomes. By the end of the workshop, we hope that those in attendance will have gained resources that will allow them to implement our oCUBE multi-interactive model in order to facilitate knowledge mobilization and foster professional development. 1. Hamlin, K. Unconference.net, Like a conference only better, http://www.unconference.net 2. Follett, J. 2006. Understanding the Unconference, http://www.digital-web.com/articles/understanding_the_unconference