- Email: [email protected]
Basic Medical Education in the British Isles
BIOCHEMICAL EDUCATION
April 1978
Vol. 6 No. 2
35
E D W A R D GLASSMAN TEACHING BIOCIIEMISTRY IN COOPERATIVE LEARNING GROUPS I like to teach biochemistry by dividing a class into permanent independent learning groups of 8 to 10 students, and then providing problems and exercises designed to promote group interaction in such a way that all students can provide unique contributions toward a quality solution of the problem posed in the exercise. I do not sit with the learning groups except by negotiation, and then for the m i n i m u m amount of time necessary to accomplish a previously agreed upon agenda. 1 attend to my goals and needs in the course; the learning group attends to theirs. If there is a conflict between these goals, disagreements are resolved by negotiation and consensus using systematic techniques of groups dynamics that facilitate the achievement of consensus. I set limits for the learning group consistent with my goals, my department's goals, and goals of the university. These goals involve course objectives, scheduling, exams, grades, etc.; some of these, however, are open for negotiation with the learning group when possible. I provide input through structured exercises, discussion questions, problems to be solved, assigned readings, etc. I do not lecture or provide content directly. I act as a resource consultant to the learning group. (a) I do not answer questions or give opinions pertaining to content; instead I refer them to other sources (persons, books, articles). I am thus not perceived as the only expert present; this greatly reduces their dependency on me. (b) I do not judge or evaluate student performance prematurely. The students are therefore free to risk and learn from their mistakes. (c) I allow the students to self-motivate. I do not entertain, tell jokes, perform, cajole, enthuse, or use charisma. I do not feel or act responsible for what the student learns. Thus the responsibility is placed on the student for his own learning. 1 take responsibility as n guide to the processes of group interaction that facilitate creativity, independence, and self-direction in the learners. I do this through applications of group dynamics and through short exercises and questionnaires designed to increase awareness of helpful and dysfunctional activities in groups that affect learning. I train the group members in skills that lead to cooperative interactions that facilitate the learning process in each student. A recent example of such a course in Biochemistry 107 (Applications of Biochemistry to Genetics). Such important features relevant to this approach are: 1. The class met in one 3-hour session per week. This provided enough time in each session to deal with considerable biochemistry content, group interaction skills, and other issues. 2. I prepared content exercises for the first 6 session. During these sessions, the students learned a considerable amount of
Department of Biochemistry Medical School University of North Carolina C h a p e l Hill, N . C . 27514, U . S . A . biochemistry and genetics, and also learned group interaction skills a n d how to teach using learning groups. 3. The students were informed during the first session that I would be responsible for the content exercises for the first six sessions, after which they would take over the class with respect to determining content and to generating exercises. I would always be available as a process guide and a resource consultant. 4. During the first six sessions the exercises were designed to achieve the following: (a) First and foremost, to enable the student to learn a great deal about some aspects of biochemistry and genetics, and to apply what was learned toward solving specific scientific problems posed in the exercises. (b) To allow the students to develop productive group interaction skills that facilitate learning in a group. (c) To facilitate awareness of the subject areas encompassed by the course title so the students could rationally determine the content of the course. (d) To allow the students to achieve consensus in the third or fourth session concerning the content of course after the sixth session. (e) To increase student awareness of the necessity of grading and evaluating performance; to allow them to practice and experience open self-evaluation, and open evaluation by the group and by myself in low-risk situations. During the last meeting of the semester, self-, peer- and faculty evaluation were openly blended by the group to achieve a grade satisfactory to all concerned. There were no written exams. Thus by the end of the first six sessions the students had developed diverse skills and were able to design the course with respect to the content of the last 7 sessions; the instructional format of these 7 sessions; the criteria and method of achieving a grade in this course. The outcome of this approach was: (a) An enormous amount of enthusiasm and self-motivation to learn the content of this course. It was agreed by the students that they learned more in this course than any other they had taken (most were seniors); also, that they worked harder in this course more willingly than in any other. (b) A very high level of cooperation, trust, and interaction arose among members of the learning group. (c) Interpersonal interaction skills were considerably improved. We even video-taped several discussions so the students could see themselves and apply self-corrective behaviors. (d) the students became m u c h more comfortable in evaluating themselves and others in the group; feedback was more open, direct, and realistic. (e) their attitude toward the subject material was very positive and accepting. They really wanted to learn and worked hard to do SO.
II
The Genetic Code B r i a n F. C. C l a r k . E d w a r d A r n o l d ( P u b l i s h e r s ) L t d . , 1977. P p . iv + 74. Price: £ 1 . 6 0 ( p a p e r b a c k ) . This book, or rather booklet, illustrates the disadvantages inherent in publishing text book material in the form of a large n u m b e r of independent units. Because each unit has to stand on its own, introductory material must be included, and in the case of Clark's book, almost a third of its meagre 74 pages are introductory. Yet this is inadequate and there is, for example, no detailed treatment of the evidence for DNA being the hereditary information, or for it being used to code for protein. The rest of the book contains a well written, but very basic account of the genetic
code. The length was presumably restricted by editorial policy, but it is surprising to find that no room could be found for subjects such as nonsense suppression, a topic important both because it sheds light on tRNA function and because its understanding is essential in order to appreciate how nonsense m u t a n t s can be handled experimentally. I can see little reason to recommend this book. Within the framework of the series, the author has done well, but a fuller and just as up-to-date treatment of the genetic code is to be found in a n u m b e r of text books of molecular genetics, which cost only three or four times as much but contain over ten times as much material. D. J. Cove Department of Genetics University of Leeds
April 1978
Vol. 6 No. 2
35
E D W A R D GLASSMAN TEACHING BIOCIIEMISTRY IN COOPERATIVE LEARNING GROUPS I like to teach biochemistry by dividing a class into permanent independent learning groups of 8 to 10 students, and then providing problems and exercises designed to promote group interaction in such a way that all students can provide unique contributions toward a quality solution of the problem posed in the exercise. I do not sit with the learning groups except by negotiation, and then for the m i n i m u m amount of time necessary to accomplish a previously agreed upon agenda. 1 attend to my goals and needs in the course; the learning group attends to theirs. If there is a conflict between these goals, disagreements are resolved by negotiation and consensus using systematic techniques of groups dynamics that facilitate the achievement of consensus. I set limits for the learning group consistent with my goals, my department's goals, and goals of the university. These goals involve course objectives, scheduling, exams, grades, etc.; some of these, however, are open for negotiation with the learning group when possible. I provide input through structured exercises, discussion questions, problems to be solved, assigned readings, etc. I do not lecture or provide content directly. I act as a resource consultant to the learning group. (a) I do not answer questions or give opinions pertaining to content; instead I refer them to other sources (persons, books, articles). I am thus not perceived as the only expert present; this greatly reduces their dependency on me. (b) I do not judge or evaluate student performance prematurely. The students are therefore free to risk and learn from their mistakes. (c) I allow the students to self-motivate. I do not entertain, tell jokes, perform, cajole, enthuse, or use charisma. I do not feel or act responsible for what the student learns. Thus the responsibility is placed on the student for his own learning. 1 take responsibility as n guide to the processes of group interaction that facilitate creativity, independence, and self-direction in the learners. I do this through applications of group dynamics and through short exercises and questionnaires designed to increase awareness of helpful and dysfunctional activities in groups that affect learning. I train the group members in skills that lead to cooperative interactions that facilitate the learning process in each student. A recent example of such a course in Biochemistry 107 (Applications of Biochemistry to Genetics). Such important features relevant to this approach are: 1. The class met in one 3-hour session per week. This provided enough time in each session to deal with considerable biochemistry content, group interaction skills, and other issues. 2. I prepared content exercises for the first 6 session. During these sessions, the students learned a considerable amount of
Department of Biochemistry Medical School University of North Carolina C h a p e l Hill, N . C . 27514, U . S . A . biochemistry and genetics, and also learned group interaction skills a n d how to teach using learning groups. 3. The students were informed during the first session that I would be responsible for the content exercises for the first six sessions, after which they would take over the class with respect to determining content and to generating exercises. I would always be available as a process guide and a resource consultant. 4. During the first six sessions the exercises were designed to achieve the following: (a) First and foremost, to enable the student to learn a great deal about some aspects of biochemistry and genetics, and to apply what was learned toward solving specific scientific problems posed in the exercises. (b) To allow the students to develop productive group interaction skills that facilitate learning in a group. (c) To facilitate awareness of the subject areas encompassed by the course title so the students could rationally determine the content of the course. (d) To allow the students to achieve consensus in the third or fourth session concerning the content of course after the sixth session. (e) To increase student awareness of the necessity of grading and evaluating performance; to allow them to practice and experience open self-evaluation, and open evaluation by the group and by myself in low-risk situations. During the last meeting of the semester, self-, peer- and faculty evaluation were openly blended by the group to achieve a grade satisfactory to all concerned. There were no written exams. Thus by the end of the first six sessions the students had developed diverse skills and were able to design the course with respect to the content of the last 7 sessions; the instructional format of these 7 sessions; the criteria and method of achieving a grade in this course. The outcome of this approach was: (a) An enormous amount of enthusiasm and self-motivation to learn the content of this course. It was agreed by the students that they learned more in this course than any other they had taken (most were seniors); also, that they worked harder in this course more willingly than in any other. (b) A very high level of cooperation, trust, and interaction arose among members of the learning group. (c) Interpersonal interaction skills were considerably improved. We even video-taped several discussions so the students could see themselves and apply self-corrective behaviors. (d) the students became m u c h more comfortable in evaluating themselves and others in the group; feedback was more open, direct, and realistic. (e) their attitude toward the subject material was very positive and accepting. They really wanted to learn and worked hard to do SO.
II
The Genetic Code B r i a n F. C. C l a r k . E d w a r d A r n o l d ( P u b l i s h e r s ) L t d . , 1977. P p . iv + 74. Price: £ 1 . 6 0 ( p a p e r b a c k ) . This book, or rather booklet, illustrates the disadvantages inherent in publishing text book material in the form of a large n u m b e r of independent units. Because each unit has to stand on its own, introductory material must be included, and in the case of Clark's book, almost a third of its meagre 74 pages are introductory. Yet this is inadequate and there is, for example, no detailed treatment of the evidence for DNA being the hereditary information, or for it being used to code for protein. The rest of the book contains a well written, but very basic account of the genetic
code. The length was presumably restricted by editorial policy, but it is surprising to find that no room could be found for subjects such as nonsense suppression, a topic important both because it sheds light on tRNA function and because its understanding is essential in order to appreciate how nonsense m u t a n t s can be handled experimentally. I can see little reason to recommend this book. Within the framework of the series, the author has done well, but a fuller and just as up-to-date treatment of the genetic code is to be found in a n u m b e r of text books of molecular genetics, which cost only three or four times as much but contain over ten times as much material. D. J. Cove Department of Genetics University of Leeds