Evaluating Outreach

This project focused on how data was collected and analyzed in the University of Iowa STEM Outreach community, in addition to what aspects could be improved and how. Through interviews, meetings, research, and actual data collection in outreach settings, this project allowed me to meet with different STEM Outreach organizations and fantastic STEM communicators. A final set of ideas and recommendations are outlined below

Science Outreach Collaboration with Upward Bound

As part of a science outreach collaboration with Upward Bound, a federal TRIO program that helps first-generation and low-income high school students prepare for postsecondary education, a Saturday symposium event was hosted where Upward Bound students were provided with hands-on, interactive science activities, in fields such as a biology, in order to encourage them to pursue careers in science

Risk of bias reporting in the recent animal focal cerebral ischaemia literature

BACKGROUND: Findings from in vivo research may be less reliable where studies do not report measures to reduce risks of bias. The experimental stroke community has been at the forefront of implementing changes to improve reporting, but it is not known whether these efforts are associated with continuous improvements. Our aims here were firstly to validate an automated tool to assess risks of bias in published works, and secondly to assess the reporting of measures taken to reduce the risk of bias within recent literature for two experimental models of stroke. METHODS: We developed and used text analytic approaches to automatically ascertain reporting of measures to reduce risk of bias from full-text articles describing animal experiments inducing middle cerebral artery occlusion (MCAO) or modelling lacunar stroke. RESULTS: Compared with previous assessments, there were improvements in the reporting of measures taken to reduce risks of bias in the MCAO literature but not in the lacunar stroke literature. Accuracy of automated annotation of risk of bias in the MCAO literature was 86% (randomization), 94% (blinding) and 100% (sample size calculation); and in the lacunar stroke literature accuracy was 67% (randomization), 91% (blinding) and 96% (sample size calculation). DISCUSSION: There remains substantial opportunity for improvement in the reporting of animal research modelling stroke, particularly in the lacunar stroke literature. Further, automated tools perform sufficiently well to identify whether studies report blinded assessment of outcome, but improvements are required in the tools to ascertain whether randomization and a sample size calculation were reported

Data Plan

Image part of Evaluating Outreachhttps://ir.uiowa.edu/ideal_latham_images/1121/thumbnail.jp

Upward Bound Event - Classroom Time

Image part of Teaching Real Innovative (TRI) STEMhttps://ir.uiowa.edu/ideal_latham_images/1114/thumbnail.jp

Upward Bound Event - Astronomy Demonstration

Image part of Teaching Real Innovative (TRI) STEMhttps://ir.uiowa.edu/ideal_latham_images/1116/thumbnail.jp

Using STEM in Class

Image part of Teaching Real Innovative (TRI) STEMhttps://ir.uiowa.edu/ideal_latham_images/1115/thumbnail.jp

Upward Bound Event - Full Class

Image part of Teaching Real Innovative (TRI) STEMhttps://ir.uiowa.edu/ideal_latham_images/1118/thumbnail.jp

Diagnostic Flowchart/Identification Schematic of S. Aureus

Image part of Teaching Real Innovative (TRI) STEMhttps://ir.uiowa.edu/ideal_latham_images/1120/thumbnail.jp

TRI Stem Logo

Image part of Teaching Real Innovative (TRI) STEMhttps://ir.uiowa.edu/ideal_latham_images/1112/thumbnail.jp