Regis College Application for Promotion to Full Professor Activities ...
Regis College Application for Promotion to Full Professor Activities ...
Regis College Application for Promotion to Full Professor Activities ...
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
Friday September 06, 2013
Regis College
Application for Promotion to Full Professor
Activities Report from Fall 2006 to Spring 2013
Marie-dominique Franco, Associate Professor of Biology
Marie-dominique Franco
Regis University
Department of Biology, Mail code D-8
3333 Regis Boulevard
Denver, CO 80221
Tel: 303-458-4198
E-mail: mfranco@regis.edu
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. Teaching Experience ……………………………………………………………………..pages 2-6
A. Classroom Teaching Activities
B. Summary of Classroom Teaching Activities
II. Individualized Workload ……………………………………………………………….pages 6-7
III. Teaching Effectiveness …………………………………………………………...…….pages 7-14
A. Students’ Evaluation of Teaching Effectiveness
B. Self-Evaluation of Teaching Effectiveness
C. Long-Term Teaching Effectiveness Goals
IV. Research, Creative Work and Professional Activities …...pages 14-17
A. Research and Professional Activities
B. Self-Evaluation of Research and Professional Activities
C. Long-Term Research and Professional Goals
V. Service to the University, including Service to the Student Body ……………………pages 17-22
A. Service Activities
B. Self-Evaluation of Service Activities
C. Long-Term Service Goals
VI. Summary ………………………………………………………………………………..page 22
VII. Curriculum vitae……………………………………………………...………………...pages 23-30
Appendices ……………………………………………………………..……………………pages 31-224
Appendix I: Course Syllabi
Appendix II: Molecular and Cellular Biology “In-Class Notes” (BL260)
Appendix III: Sample of PPT lecture (BL260)
Appendix IV: Assessment Analyses for Molecular and Cellular Biology lecture, laboratory and
Honors courses (BL260/261/261H) and Developmental Biology lecture and laboratory courses
(BL412/413)
Appendix V: Developmental Biology Laboratory Manual, “From Molecules to Organisms: An
Investigative Approach to the Developmental Biology Laboratory”
Appendix VI: Application TBL for undergraduate Genetics lecture (BL414)
Appendix VII: Peer-review article: Franco M-d, Bohbot J, Fernandez K, Hanna J, Poppy J, and
Vogt R. (2007) Sensory Cell Proliferation within the Olfactory Epithelium of Developing Adult
Manduca sexta (Lepidoptera). PLoS ONE 2(2): e215. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0000215
Appendix VIII: TriBeta Student Grant
Appendix IX: SPARC Student Grant
Appendix X: Research Poster
Appendix XI: SPARC Faculty Grant
Appendix XII: Biology Department Annual Report (2012-2013 academic year)
- 1 -
I hold a Ph. D. in Immunology from the University of Aix-Marseille II, France and joined Regis
University in the Fall of 2001. I taught as a full-time faculty member for 6 years at the rank of Assistant
Professor and have been teaching for 6 years at the rank of Associate Professor at Regis College (I was
granted tenure in the Spring of 2007). Therefore the current academic year (2013-2014) is the seventh
academic year of my full-time employment as an Associate Professor in Regis College. This report
will describe and analyze the activities I have performed over the past 7 years, a period that
encompasses a sabbatical leave (Spring 2008), a partial bereavement leave (2/3 of Fall 2010) and 4 years
of chairing the Biology Department. During this period I have continued to be very dedicated to my
teaching with developing and implementing new pedagogical tools and new courses at both the
undergraduate and graduate level, I have kept an active research program, published a laboratory manual
and conducted research with many students. Finally, I have committed most of my service activities to
chairing the Biology Department. During my chairship, the department under my direct or indirect
supervision hired 4 tenure-track Assistant Professors (moving from 6 to 9 full-time faculty members), 1
half-time, continuing faculty member 1 Administrative Coordinator, 1 Administrative Assistant, 1
Laboratory Preparator. In addition I was Chair as the Department remodeled its office space, wrote 1
academic unit review, developed 2 strategic plans, developed and redeveloped 3 assessment plan
versions as requirements shifted from year to year, piloted portfolio assessment and developed and
implemented the first new Master’s degree program in Regis College in over 20 years, the M.S. in
Biomedical Sciences. This past 7 year have been very gratifying and rewarding in so many ways, but
they also exhausted my energy, thus I am looking forward to a new era in my professional development,
spending more of my time refining my courses and publishing the work my research students and I have
completed while remaining an engaged citizen of the Regis Community.
I. Teaching Experience
A. Classroom Teaching Activities since the Award of Tenure
Syllabi I have either completely remodeled since being tenured or have developed anew are
shown in Appendices Ia-g. In this section, all semester hours refer to students semester hours (SH).
Academic year 2006-2007
Courses Taught in Fall 2006
• BL 466 RU01 (3 SH), Immunology lecture (14 students).
• BL 263 RU04 (1 SH), Organismic Biology laboratory (23 students).
• BL 263 RU05 (1 SH), Organismic Biology laboratory (23 students).
• BL 490E RU01 (3 SH), Independent Studies in Biology where Annia Martial (Biology senior)
developed, conducted and analyzed a survey entitled “Incidence of illness in function of eating
and exercising habits and incidence of recovery in function of medical and/or spiritual assistance
in the Regis College student population”.
• CCS 400 RU02 (3 SH), Junior Seminar: Health Care in the World, An Inclusive Approach (21
students).
Courses Taught in Spring 2007
• BL 260 RU01 (3 SH), Molecular and Cellular Biology lecture (43 students).
• BL 260 RU02 (3 SH), Molecular and Cellular Biology lecture (33 students).
• BL 261 RU01 (1 SH), Molecular and Cellular Biology laboratory (21 students).
• BL 261 RU02 (1 SH), Molecular and Cellular Biology laboratory (19 students).
- 2 -
• BL 490E (3 SH), Independent Studies in Biology: Developmental Biology Research where
Chelsea Ruller (Biology Senior) investigated the expression of Pax-6 and β-catenin proteins
expressions in developing chick embryos using Western blot analysis.
Honors (Honors thesis Advisor and Reader roles will be mentioned in the teaching section as well as the
service section, starting with bi-monthly meetings, Honors thesis advising moved to 1-hour long weekly
meetings).
Honors Thesis Advisor for Joanna Welch (Biology major). Thesis title “An analysis of hip structure and
related function in cerebral palsy”.
Total teaching credit hours: 21.11 and Total students: 200
Academic year 2007-2008
Courses Taught in Fall 2007
• BL 263 (1 SH), Organismic Biology laboratory RU03 (25 students).
• BL 466 (3 SH), Immunology lecture (24 students).
• CCS 400 (3 SH), Junior Seminar: Health Care in the World (18 students).
Courses Taught in Spring 2008 – SABBATICAL leave
• BL 491E Undergraduate Research in Biology (1 SH, 4 Students 0.444 TC) where Claire
Birkenheuer, Alexander Colgan, Sohayla Hadjimaleki and Crystal Kay investigated the
expression of gap genes in developing and adult Drosophila melanogaster.
Total teaching credit hours: 8.444 and Total students: 71
Academic year 2008-2009
Courses taught in Fall 2008
• BL 412 (3 SH): Developmental Biology lecture (18 students).
• BL 413 (1 SH): Developmental Biology laboratory (16 students).
• CCS 400 (3 SH): Junior Core Seminar: Health Care in the world (18 students).
• BL 498 (3 SH): Internship in Biology- Dentistry, supervised Melissa Herbert, Biology major.
Courses taught in Spring 2009
• BL 260 RU01 (3 SH): Molecular and Cellular Biology lecture (37 students).
• BL 260 RU02 (3 SH): Molecular and Cellular Biology lecture (29 students).
• BL 261 RU04 (1 SH): Molecular and cellular Biology laboratory (14 students).
• BL 261H (2 SH): Molecular and cellular Biology laboratory and Seminar (13 students).
Total teaching credit hours: 19.33 and Total number of students: 146
Academic year 2009-2010
Courses taught in Fall 2009
• BL 263 RU04 (1 SH), Organismic Biology laboratory (24 students).
• BL 412 RU01 (3 SH), Developmental Biology lecture (22 students).
• 466 RU01 (3 SH), Immunology lecture (25 students).
Courses taught in Spring 2010
• 260 RU01 (3 SH), Molecular and Cellular Biology lecture (46 students).
- 3 -
• 260 RU02 (3 SH), Molecular and Cellular Biology lecture (42 students).
• 261H RU01 (2 SH), Molecular and Cellular Biology laboratory and Seminar Honors (10
students).
• BL499B (1 SH), Biology Senior Thesis II (2 students).
Honors
Honors Thesis Advisor for Sid White (Chemistry major). Sid withdrew from the Honors program at the
end of his senior year.
Honors Thesis Reader for Erika Tanaka (Biology major). Thesis title “Bridging Cultures”.
Total teaching credit hours: 18.22 and Total number of students: 169
Academic year 2010-2011
Courses taught in Fall 2010 (I only taught one month in the semester as I took a bereavement leave to
go to France to be with my dying mother)
• BL 263 RU05 (1 SH), Organismic Biology laboratory (23 students).
• BL 412 RU01 (3 SH), Developmental Biology lecture (7 students).
• RCC 410D RU01 (3 SH), Medical Anthropology Seminar (17 students).
• BL 491E Undergraduate Research in Biology (1 SH) where Nicolette Mineo developed and
maintained a sea urchin colony and optimized fertilization events.
Courses taught in Spring 2011
• 260 RU01 (3 SH), Molecular and Cellular Biology lecture (50 students).
• 260 RU02 (3 SH), Molecular and Cellular Biology lecture (48 students).
• 261H RU01 (2 SH), Molecular and Cellular Biology laboratory and Seminar Honors (11
students).
• BL 491E Undergraduate Research in Biology (1 SH) where Jeffrey Hassebrock and Alexandra
Lynch investigated the expression of gap protein in developing and adult Drosophila
melanogaster and Nicolette Mineo and Meghan Moroze continued working on establishing a
healthy sea urchin colony and performing immunocytochemistry of the actin protein expression
in developing sea urchin embryos.
Total teaching credit hours: 18.44 and Total number of students: 161
Academic year 2011-2012
Courses taught in Fall 2011
• RCC 410D RU01 (3 SH), Medical Anthropology Seminar (18 students).
• 466 RU01 (3 SH), Immunology lecture (22 students).
• BL 614 RU01 (3 SH), Biomedical Genetics (22 students).
• BL 498 (3 SH): Internship in Biology- Denver Medical Examiner Office, supervised Sonny
Stoen, Junior Biology major.
Courses taught in Spring 2012
• BL 414 RU01 (3 SH), Genetics lecture (52 students).
• BL 414H RU01 (1 SH), Genetics Honors seminar (10 students).
• BL 415 RU01 (1 SH), Genetics laboratory (24 students).
• BL 415 RU02 (1 SH), Genetics laboratory (21 students).
- 4 -
• BL 491E Undergraduate Research in Biology (1 SH) where Genevieve Go investigated the
expression of the Hairy protein in developing and adult Drosophila melanogaster.
Honors
Honors Thesis Advisor for Emmie Altepeter (Biology major). Thesis title “Madagascar: Transitions in
health care”.
Honors Thesis Reader for Alexander Ghincea (Biology major). Thesis title “Beauty and elegance in the
world around us”.
Honors Thesis Reader for Lana Schamberger (Biology major). Thesis title “The changing face of
Autism Spectrum Disorder”.
Total teaching credit hours: 17.33 and Total number of students: 171
Academic year 2012-2013
Courses taught in Fall 2012
• BL 391 RU01 (2 SH), Applied Clinical Research (8 students).
• BL 490 (1 SH), Immunology lecture as Independent Study (1 student).
• BL 495 RU01 (1 SH), Seminar in Biological Research (11 students).
• BL 498 RU01 (3 SH), Internship in Biology (1 student).
• BL 610A RU01 (1 SH), Biomedical Sciences Seminar I (20 students, co-taught with Dr.
Ghedotti who was the primary Instructor).
• BL 610B RU01 (2 SH), Biomedical Sciences Seminar II (18 students).
• BL 614 RU01 (3 SH), Biomedical Genetics (18 students).
Courses taught in Spring 2013
• BL 391 RU01 (2 SH), Applied Clinical Research (2 students).
• BL 414 RU01 (3 SH), Genetics lecture (43 students).
• BL 415 RU01 (1 SH), Genetics laboratory (22 students).
• BL 415 RU02 (1 SH), Genetics laboratory (20 students).
• BL 498 (3 SH): Internship in Biology- Denver Medical Examiner Office, supervised Daniel
Ohmes, Junior Neuroscience major. Orofacial Myology Private Practice, supervised Taylor
White, Senior Biology major.
• BL 628 RU01 (3 SH), Biomedical Externship, (18 students, co-taught with Dr. Betz).
Honors
Honors Thesis Advisor for Jeffrey Hassebrock (Biology major). Thesis title “Mixed agency”.
Honors Thesis Advisor for Alexandra Lynch (Biology major). Thesis title “Abortion, sterilization and
physician assisted suicide”.
Honors Thesis Advisor for Sonny Stoen (Biology major). Thesis title “Terminal and life-threatening
conditions”.
Total teaching credit hours: 19.11 and Total number of students: 183
B. Summary of Classroom Teaching Activities
For the past 7 years I have been teaching an average of 169 students (Table I) per year and very
diverse courses as it relates to content and also category. Indeed, on average, per year I taught biology
lecture courses, biology laboratory courses, Core seminar courses, biology Honors courses and many
- 5 -
other courses that have been regrouped into a category in the Biology Department called Undergraduate
Experiential Learning courses. These courses are Applied Clinical Research (BL391), Undergraduate
Research in Biology (BL491E) and Internship in Biology (BL498) and I have been the Director of the
Biology Undergraduate Experiential Learning Program since Fall 2012. The Biology Department
moved to this format to address the need for rigor across these various practical experiences and to
compensate one faculty with tangible teaching credits (3SH for overseeing all students in all three
courses both Fall and Spring semesters). Historically, these courses generated 1 teaching credit hour for
3 students supervised in 3 semester hours or 0.111 teaching credit per student per semester hour. Many
of us who taught those courses spent an average of one contact hour per week per student, advised their
work and mentored them in many ways. Thus the consolidation of these courses into one unit allowed
for one faculty member to receive 3 teaching credits per year. Having internship and initial research
oversight done by a single faculty member who meets with students as a group and individually, greatly
improve students’ experience by fostering student discussion within each course and focusing students
more consistently on more broadly integrative internship and research outcomes, while at the same time
reducing the oversight burden on faculty and providing a single contact person for the Internship Office
and Denver Health Hospital with which we offer BL 391. This past year I had 19 students enrolled in
the various Biology Undergraduate Experiential Learning courses.
Table I: Numbers of teaching credits and students taught for the 7-year period (data collected from endof-semester
rosters).
Academic Year Teaching Credits Number of Students Taught
2006-2007 21.11 200
2007-2008* 8.44 71
2008-2009 19.33 146
2009-2010 18.22 169
2010*-2011 18.44 161
2011-2012 17.33 171
2012-2013 19.11 183
7-year period 121.98 1,101
Mean per year with
18.77
one Ind. Comp. except year 2006-07 (17-19 range being expected)
169
*Sabbatical and bereavement leaves in S08 and F10 respectively. I taught one month in the latter.
II. Individualized Workload
The standard employment expectation for full-time Regis College faculty consists of a) one
Community Component of service and scholarship responsibilities common to all faculty members, b)
six Teaching Components and c) one STEPP (Scholarship, Teaching, Extraordinary Service, Pedagogy
and Program) Component (Regis College Faculty Handbook, 2013). Therefore, in general faculty
members are expected to teach between 20-22 TH if they choose teaching as their STEPP or between
17-19 TH if they choose another STEPP component. STEPP Component was instituted in the Fall of
2011, before which faculty members were eligible for Individual Component. For the past 7 year,
except for the academic year 06-07 where I thought at the maximum TH, I was either granted a
scholarship Individual Component/ STEPP or I was Chair, thus operated with a service STEPP and
taught 17-19 TH per year (Table II).
I will take this opportunity to mention that sciences faculty members are faced with a unique
situation as it relates to reconciling teaching credits and numbers of courses they teach. Indeed, most
standard laboratory courses are worth 2 teaching credits for the same amount of contact hours a standard
- 6 -
3 teaching credits lecture course generate. In addition, biology laboratory courses require a lot of
preparation, grading and time spent outside the allotted period because biologists work with living
organisms and cells that require constant attention, and perform experiments that may require timeline
not confined to a 3-hour period. Therefore, biology faculty members regularly teach more courses than
their colleagues to reach the required amount of teaching credits.
Table II: Summary of individualized workload for the 7-year period (data collected from end-ofsemester
rosters).
STEPPs or Individual Component
Acad. Year Chair Scholarship Expected TH
Total
TH
S13- F12 course release 17-19 19.11 200
S12- F11 course release STEPP 14-16 17.33 71
S11- F10* 1 ind. component 17-19 18.44 146
S10- F09 1 ind. component 17-19 18.22 169
S09- F08 1 ind. component 17-19 19.33 161
S08*- F07 1 ind. component 8.5-9 (Spring sabbatical) 8.44 171
S07- F06 None 20-22 21.11 183
Mean per year with
1 Ind. Component except year 2006 07
(17-19 range being expected)
Number of
students
18.77 169
*Sabbatical and bereavement leaves in S08 and F10 respectively. I taught one month in the latter.
III. Teaching Effectiveness
A. Students’ Evaluation of Teaching Effectiveness
Although somewhat subjective and not fully informative, I believe that students’ evaluations, when
combined with other sources of information, are of great value. In general, they have corroborated my
self-evaluations over the years and have helped me develop strategies to rectify problems. Table III
shows the summary of my students’ evaluations per course and semester and compares them (Franco
mean) to those of Regis College (College mean). Analysis of the data shows that my mean per semester
is higher than the one of the College (compare 4.35 to 4.33) and most importantly that my median
number is also higher than the one of the college (compare 4.41 to 4.34). Also, even though my lowest
mean is only slightly lower than the College one (compare 4.12 to 4.15), my highest mean is
significantly higher than the college one (compare 4.56 to 4.39). Further analysis shows that my mean
score for elective courses is 4.56 while my mean score for required courses (graduate and undergraduate
courses) is 4.25. It is somewhat expected to have a small variance within a large pool (all College
faculty) compared to a larger one for a given individual who will experience personal highs and lows.
Indeed, my highest scores correlate with times of personal plenty while my lowest scores correlate with
time of hardships in my life outside of Regis. My overall scores closely follow the ones of the Biology
Department with a few lower and a few higher; the Biology Department is a challenging department to
compare oneself to because of its high performing status. The next section will specifically address my
low and high scores in the context of each course. In sum, over the past 7-year period, I believe that my
teaching evaluations show overall consistency of quality with a few minor exceptions that I will address
in the next section.
- 7 -
Table III: Means of students teaching evaluations since tenure. Note that Spring 2008 and Fall 2010 are missing because of sabbatical
and bereavement leaves respectively. All questions but the demographics questions have been included in the means. There is
currently no system by which to assess the courses in the Experiential Learning program.
F06 S07 F07 F08 S09 F09 S10 S11 F11 S12 F12 S13
BL260 RU01: Mol. and Cell Bio. lect. 4.30 3.78 4.25 4.11
BL260 RU02: Mol. and Cell Bio. lect. 4.28 4.14 4.11 3.98
BL261 RU01: Mol. and Cell Bio. lab. 4.36
BL261 RU02: Mol. and Cell. Bio. lab. 4.66
BL261 RU04: Mol. and Cell Bio. lab. 3.90
BL261H: Mol. and Cell Bio. Honors 4.70 4.91 4.55
BL263 RU03: Organismic Bio. lab. 4.39
BL263 RU04: Organismic Bio. lab. 4.36 4.28
BL263 RU05: Organismic Bio. lab 4.34
BL466: Immunology lect. 4.55 4.66 4.44 4.53
BL412: Developmental Bio. lect. 4.59 4.40
BL413: Developmental Bio. lab 4.58
BL414: Genetics lect. 4.20 4.05
BL414H: Genetics Honors 4.91
BL415 RU01: Genetics lab. 4.37 4.26
BL415 RU02: Genetics lab. 4.46 4.05
BL495: Seminar in Bio. Research Lit. 4.88
CCS400: Junior Seminar 4.27 4.63 4.08
RCC400D: Diversity 4.53
BL610B: Biomedical Science Seminar . 3.86
BL614: Biomedical Genetics 4.19 4.09
Mean per semester
Mean
Franco 4.38 4.40 4.56 4.42 4.13 4.37 4.42 4.21 4.42 4.48 4.28 4.12 4.35
College 4.34 4.38 4.15 4.31 4.32 4.32 4.32 4.34 4.39 4.35 4.38 4.39 4.33
Mean have been sorted from smallest to highest to show distribution
Median per semester
Median
Franco 4.12 4.13 4.21 4.27 4.34 4.37 4.38 4.40 4.41 4.42 4.48 4.56 4.41
College 4.15 4.31 4.32 4.32 4.32 4.34 4.34 4.35 4.38 4.38 4.39 4.39 4.34
- 8 -
B. Self-Evaluation of Teaching Effectiveness
During this past 7 years, I have taught 14 different courses ranging from lecture, to laboratory, to
seminar, to research, to independent study and to honors and formally assessed the courses with more
than 10 students using some form of outcomes assessment measure (assessment results are presented for
selected courses in Appendix IV). Those courses fulfilled requirements of the Biology, Core and Honors
curricula as defined by these various programs. Since granted tenured, I have redesigned the second
semester of Introduction to Biology: Molecular and Cellular Biology course (BL260), the upper-division
elective biology courses Developmental Biology lecture and laboratory courses (BL412/413) and the
Diversity Integrative Core Seminar: Health care in the World (RCC400D). In addition, I have developed
and implemented undergraduate and graduate Genetics lecture courses (BL414 and BL614) and 2 Honors
courses for Molecular and Cellular Biology (BL261H) and Genetics (BL414H) while keeping the
laboratory part of the undergraduate genetics as it was taught (I am planning on writing a Genetics
Laboratory Manual during my up-coming sabbatical leave). In the following paragraphs, I will mainly
discuss my teaching effectiveness and my teaching effectiveness goals for selected courses that best
reflect my teaching competence either because of their frequency in my course rotation or because of their
relevance to the Biology, Core, or Honors curricula. These courses are Principles of Biology: Molecular
and Cellular Biology lecture course (BL 260), Developmental Biology lecture and laboratory courses (BL
412 and BL 413), Genetics courses (undergraduate and graduate courses; BL414/415 and BL614) Honors
courses (Molecular and Cellular Biology and Genetics, BL261H and BL414) and Core Seminar (CCS 400
transformed into RCC400D). I am deliberately not discussing the following courses in details because I
have only taught them infrequently, sometimes as an isolated occurrence or because I have been
performing very well.
• Introduction to Biology: Molecular and Cellular Biology (BL261) and Organismic Biology
(BL263) laboratory courses. I have taught them for only 2 semesters before I rotated out of the
Introduction to Biology sequence and had not changed the BL261 course since granted tenure
(BL263 is developed by Dr. Ghedotti). Also these courses are being completely redesigned
starting this academic year. In general, the sections I taught went very well as reflected in my
students’ evaluations (mean of 4.33, median of 4.36 and high of 4.66) except for one abnormal
occurrence in the Spring of 2009 when I was at the same time teaching the Honors section of this
course. I may have involuntarily overlooked the regular section because I was hyper excited to
teach the Honors students for the first time.
• Biomedical Science Seminar II (BL610B) and Seminar in Biology Research Literature (BL495). I
taught the master seminar BL610B in the Fall of 2012 while Acting Program Director for the M.S.
in Biomedical Sciences. Master students have to complete a series of 4 seminars, 3 of which
taught by the Program Director. Those courses have been developed to foster student analytical
skills in using contemporary biomedical literature and introduce the range of contemporary
biological and biomedical research. These courses also guide and coordinate student externship
and Master's project work. BL610B is the second seminar in the sequence and was taught only
once before I substituted for Dr. Betz who was on sabbatical leave. Although the course was
greatly modified to address most negative comments students had, it still did not meet their
expectation as reflected in the students’ evaluations and left me very unsatisfied and frustrated.
Indeed, this second class of Master’s program students was somewhat challenging; a lot of
dramatic personal events occurred involving students at the beginning of the year and two students
had insolent personalities. Even though the students’ evaluations improved, these were my worst.
The seminar series has been completely modified over the summer and I will not teach this course
anymore. It is worth noting that I may not have been as receptive to students’ need as I was
myself faced with arduous personal circumstances, in general this year was not as good as the
9
previous ones except for outstanding scores I received (mean of 4.88) in the Seminar in Biology
Research Literature course (BL495). I think my passion for biology and teaching really came to
life in this course in the midst of the personal hardships.
• Immunology lecture course (BL466). I taught this course 4 times and performed very well every
time as demonstrated in my students’ evaluations (mean of 4.55, median of 4.54, low of 4.53 and
high of 4.66). It not surprising that teaching this course brings me much joy, indeed I hold a Ph.D.
in the same discipline and as an elective course, the enrolled students are very motivated and
usually of higher academic skills, making my work easier. This year I am teaching this course in
the Fall and redesigning it. The teaching pedagogy has consisted of formal lecturing interspaced
with in-class group exercises and students’ presentations. It appears that this mixture of strategies
is working very well and I am only planning to make a few adjustments; one being the conversion
of the in-class group exercises into formal Team-Based Learning (TBL) activities. The validity of
this formal teaching pedagogy is explained in detail later since I have already implemented it in
many other courses.
I will now discuss the courses I have greatly redesigned or developed anew; starting with the courses I
will no longer teach and ending with the genetics block (undergraduate Genetics, 1 SH Honors Genetics
seminar, and graduate Genetics). After having taught the Introduction to Biology: Molecular and Cellular
Biology lecture, laboratory courses for 10 years (later adding the honors seminar of BL261H in the last
three years), I opted to let go of those and took over the genetics undergraduate courses plus developed a
genetics Honors seminar and also developed the graduate Biomedical Genetics course that I implemented
the same year I was in charge of the undergraduate Genetics courses. All of a sudden, I became the
Geneticist in the Biology Department and spent very long hours developing new lectures, new exercises
and reading many primary research articles to ensure students were going to be exposed to the latest
research findings. This undertaking took me out of my comfort zone and challenged me to become an
expert in a short period of time. I embraced the challenge and delivered courses that were very rigorous
and interesting as demonstrated by the many comments I received. Throughout this section I will present
the pedagogies I have used, that focused on presenting the latest trends in the field and on implementing
active learning into the classroom. More specifically, I will show how the transition (over an 11-year
period) from using non formal in-group exercises to using formal TBL has impacted my instruction and
student learning.
• Introduction to Biology: Molecular and Cellular Biology lecture (BL260) and Honors Seminar
(BL261H). The lecture course (BL260, see Appendix Ia for syllabus) has been a challenging
course to teach in many ways; the most trying effort was to distill, organize and clearly present the
massive amount of materials students have to learn, often to students who are neither
psychologically nor academically ready. In order to guide students in the learning and learning
retention processes, over the years I had developed the following overall course structure where
weekly topics were formally taught, investigated and tested. In an “ideal” week, Monday was
allocated to formal lecturing, Wednesday was allocated to working on exercises and fifteen
minutes of Friday was allocated to assessing students’ knowledge. I think this sequence of
activities gave students structure; much needed at the freshman level, fostered learning
engagement and ultimately gave students a sense of satisfaction when taking tests. Students
thought this format was very well suited for learning and tests preparation and were really
appreciative. Inspired by the Regis Pharmacy School, I later decided to increase students’ learning
responsibility and started to use formal Team-Based Learning pedagogy. The up-front amount of
preparation it required was considerable (I do understand why Pharmacy had a year to prepare
when Biology modified its courses as it taught them). Even though some students expressed
10
skepticism for iRAT and tRAT components of the TBL, interesting enough all students valued the
Application TBL because none of them individually (even the over achievers) was able to solve
complex problems; at the end the team conquered and everyone was a winner. The experience
was very gratifying for me because I witnessed knowledge transfer and knowledge synergy that
was used in problem-solving; I knew that students not only had a basic understanding of the
concepts but also could apply them to various situations. In addition to incorporating TBL into the
course, I also developed what I called “In-Class Notes” as illustrated in Appendix II. Those are
compilations of little exercises that test students’ knowledge as I teach the material; checkpoints
before moving on to more complex content. Those “In-Class Notes” were not available to the
students before class periods but given at the beginning of each session. Beside developing and
implementing TBL and those “In-Class Notes”, I also completely redesigned my lectures to
introduce modern applications and techniques to render abstract concepts more tangible to
students. For example, I used Rebecca Skloot’s novel. “The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks” to
illustrate cell division and cancer (see Appendix III for lecture PPT) and also to discuss health care
inequity before it became a best seller and before the Biology Department sponsored the book for
the “First Year Reading” program started by Dr. Karen Adkins, Associate Dean for Advising &
First Year Experience. Teaching this course was emotionally exhausting, large classrooms with a
lot of entitled students who recently discovered that College was not going to be as easy as High
School. However, I never gave up on them and at the end of a 10-year period, I believed the
course I handed to my successor was a very solid course. I know students gained, retained
knowledge and knew how to apply it (see Appendix IV for assessment analysis); I believed they
were well prepared for upper-division biology courses.
The Honors seminar course (BL261H, see Appendix Ib for syllabus) was a treat to teach. The
course is a continuation of the Honors section of Introduction to Biology: Organismic Biology that
Dr. Ghedotti developed and teaches. We coordinated our readings as students read similar and
additional chapters of Jim Endersby’s book “A Guinea Pig's History of Biology”. The similar
chapters were discussed in light of molecular biology and genetics thus adding a layer of
knowledge to students’ understanding of biology and the new chapters introduced them to new
concepts. Also, this course made great use of historical and current primary research papers; we
discussed their pure biological content as well as their historic relevance. Students were actively
participating in the discussion, generating a rich academic atmosphere. The course received very
good review all 3 times I taught it (see Appendix IV for assessment analysis). In addition, I
started to receive more requests to become their Honors Thesis Advisor, my contribution
culminated last academic year (2012-2013) with the supervision of 3 concurrent theses.
• Developmental Biology lecture and laboratory courses (BL412/413). The field of developmental
biology is intrinsically a very fascinating field; it explores how the union of 2 gametes (male and
female) generates life and how a mature organism develops from a single fertilized cell. Thus and
because of its nature, it is not difficult to capture student’s attention. The field of developmental
biology is also my second area of expertise after immunology, thus I am very comfortable with the
material. Therefore, it is not surprising that these courses are rated very high. The lecture part of
the course BL412 (see Appendix Ic for syllabus) explores the various concepts using formal
lecturing and exercises and since I have not taught this course in a while, I have not yet developed
formal TBL activities. Students commented on the quality of my PPT presentations, the valuable
exercises and were overall very satisfied as exemplified with comments such as “learned and
retained more from this course than any other courses at Regis” and “interesting course taught by
a teacher who really cares”. Those two quotes summarize what I want my classroom experience
11
to be; I want students to learn and retain and I want to help them as much as possible in that quest
(see Appendix IV for assessment analysis).
The laboratory part of the course BL413 (see Appendix Id for syllabus) has been developed from
ground zero with original experiments that my research students and I developed and refined for
teaching purposes. I compiled these experiments and wrote a Developmental Biology Laboratory
Manual (see Appendix V) that was published just prior to teaching the Fall 2008 courses. The
course is divided into 4 modules, each making use of a different model organism and pairing it
with the most appropriate concepts. For example, I use the chicken Gallus gallus for classical
embryology and the fruit fly Drosophila melanogaster for developmental genetics. Students loved
getting to work with all 4 living organisms and loved to investigate their development at cellular
and molecular levels. In this course, students had to propose experiments to complete an
independent project that they presented to the Biology Department using professional scientific
poster presentation; students presented very high quality work, some worked in collaboration with
the former University of Colorado Health Science Center (UCHSC) now UCD at Anschutz (see
Appendix IV for assessment analysis). Most students constructively commented on making this
laboratory course worth 2 student credits (SH) instead of I SH because of all the extra lab-work
time students had to spend outside of the 3-hour period. The Biology Department and I agreed
with their comments and this course has since been modified to increase the number of SH.
• Core Seminar (CCS400 transformed into RCC400D). I started to teach this course when it was a
Junior Seminar course in the Fall of 2005 and have been teaching it 4 additional times in the Fall
of 2006, 2007, 2008 and 2011 as a Diversity and Cultural Tradition Core seminar. This course
addresses diversity and cultural tradition through studying the issues of health, illness and health
care in the world in light of cultural, religious and socio-economic diversities. This course has
been designed to expose students to this topic using various media; peer-review articles, books,
little videos, guest speakers, field trips to chosen communities and Community-Based Learning
(CBL), the latest in collaboration with Melissa Nix, Curriculum & Intercultural Program Director,
Center for Service Learning (see Appendix Ie for syllabus). I spent a lot of time designing a
curriculum that exposed students to the various facets of health and health disparities in this
country (U.S.A.) and in the world. For example, I collaborated with Dr. Meyers and Dr.Terry
Knapp who gave a presentation on telemedicine and how they use this methodology to treat
patients in very remote and impoverished countries. Also, I collaborated with Carey Ann Tanaka
who navigated us through the Hmong culture in Asia and in the U.S.A. and took students to
guided community gardens long before Regis had its own. I chose the gardens according to the
culture of the individuals tending them and the plants that are medicinally used. Students were
required to complete numerous and diverse requirements including the writing of a research paper
including their CBL experience and the oral presentation of their research. In order to guide them
in this process, I developed many rubrics that I later modified and used in other courses. In
general, the teaching of this course went well, students really enjoyed the course and commented
on how much it opened their eyes on 1) biological issues, 2) diversity of medicinal treatment
either biomedical or spiritual and 3) disparity issues. I think this course forced them to reflect on
what most of us take for granted, health and health care. I will continue to improve this course 1)
by improving the community-based learning component in association with Melissa Nix, 2) by
visiting other Core Seminars taught at Regis College in order to become more familiarize with
discussion-based courses, 3) by continuing to attend conferences pertinent to the field of Medical
Anthropology, the field that encompasses most of the topics of this course and, 4) by developing
collaborations with the community.
12
• Genetics lecture and seminar courses for undergraduate students (BL414, syllabi in Appendices
If) and graduate students (BL614, syllabus in Appendix Ig). I have started to teach those courses 2
years ago and they have since become one of my main teaching responsibilities. As mentioned
earlier, I started to develop TBL activities in the introductory Molecular and Cellular Biology
course (BL260) many years ago but it is in the genetics courses that I really explored and used this
teaching pedagogy. In the undergraduate course (BL414), TBL activities are a weekly occurrence
and the entire structure of the course is designed around these TBL activities. The first year I
taught the course, I believe that after the first initial hesitancy, students not only accepted this
teaching strategy by also welcomed it. In general, students were grateful for the experience, even
the ones who were at first the least enthusiastic; I was pleased with the learning atmosphere it
generated and the course went well. The following year, I decided to increase lecture time by
giving online iRATs (via D2L) versus in-class iRATs, this move did not go well. Since I had
never used online quizzing before, I misjudged the amount of time allotted per quiz and also the
number of times each quiz could be taken; I had involuntary upset the students and it took some
time to rectify the problem. Soon after, I realized that some students were cheating during the
Application TBL. Unfortunately, cheating is real, I have witnessed it in my courses over the years
and have taken appropriate measures. This year was different as the culprits were academically
strong students and moreover one of them had become a “friend” over the years. I was crushed
and addressed the entire class in a way that probably was overwhelming to them and this upset the
students a second time. Shall I continue…? All that happened this past Spring when I was dealing
with the terrifying acknowledgment that my husband’s health was deteriorating fast and there was
nothing I could do about it, I was emotionally very unstable. I finished the semester as strong as I
could, focusing on developing interesting TBL activities, designed to challenge students’
understanding (see Appendix VI for sample Application TBL). Even though my students’
evaluations numbers were not as good as the previous year (mainly because of the TBL
experience), analysis of the written comments shows that more than one third of the class thought
that TBL contributed the most to their knowledge and provided constructive critiques on how to
improve it. Thus I will continue to implement this strategy but will modify my online quizzes and
fine-tune the Application exercises.
The gradate genetics course has been very interesting to develop and is well received by students.
This course uses a mix of lecturing, informal in-group exercises and formal TBL. This TBL relies
on content from all Fall Master’s Program courses; Anatomy, Biochemistry, Genetics and
Physiology and is thus integrative. Instructors from all courses take turn in developing a TBL unit
centered on a disorder and use primary and review articles to convey content. Students like the
integrative approach as clear connections between the various courses are made very obvious, thus
developing a more global understanding. I have taught this course twice, and am teaching it now,
already implementing changes to improve it based on my personal observation and also based on
students’ comments. What seems to help students most are all the exercises we solve in class and
I have already added many to my lectures.
C. Long-Term Teaching Effectiveness Goals
In sum, I will say that my approach to teaching has evolved over the years; I am no longer trying to
prove myself as a figure of authority or knowledge, but have become an active participant in the learning
process. I believe I have grown much as a person and this growth is positively reflected in my teaching
style and how I relate to others, especially students. I will always be demanding of my students and will
always hold them accountable for their knowledge; however, I do so with more encouragement and more
invitationally, trying to tap into their interests and make connections across courses and disciplines.
13
With the ultimate goal of educating undergraduate students in Biology, in light of the Regis
University Mission Statement, I will continue to develop and implement new pedagogical strategies to
better serve my students. I intend to continue improving my existing lecture courses by incorporating
additional current knowledge and by developing more interactive in-class activities (TBL or others) as
these approaches have already proven successful. I intend to continue improving my existing laboratory
courses by better customizing experiments to our student population and to our infrastructure, by writing
laboratory manuals for all my laboratory courses and by continuing to emphasize the importance of
research. I intend to continue improving my existing Integrative Core Seminar by continuing to better
integrate the community-based learning component into the course. Ultimately, I would like the entire
class to work on one project (rather than one project per pair of students) that would benefit the
community by offering service and problem-solving solutions to the chosen local organization involved.
Also, I will continue listening to my students for improvement guidance as I find their comments to be the
most important in guiding me to better help them understand.
IV. Research, Creative Work and Professional Activities
A. Research and Professional Activities
Over the past 7-year period, most of the highlights of my scholarship occurred before I became
Chair of the Biology Department. I published original work in a peer-reviewed journal (see Appendix V),
wrote and professionally published a Developmental Biology Laboratory Manual (see Appendix IV), and
worked with many undergraduate students on research; some of whom presented their work at
professional conferences and received internal and external grants (see appendices VI, VII and VIII).
After I became Chair, I maintained an active research program and continued to train undergraduate
students to the scholarship of discovery while at the same time pursuing some activities related to the
scholarship of teaching and active learning, focusing on the Team-Based Learning (TBL) pedagogy.
Peer-reviewed Publications
• Franco M-d, Bohbot J, Fernandez K, Hanna J, Poppy J, and Vogt R. (2007) Sensory Cell
Proliferation within the Olfactory Epithelium of Developing Adult Manduca sexta (Lepidoptera).
PLoS ONE 2(2): e215. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0000215. (Appendix V).
Textbook Publications
• Franco, Marie-dominique (2009) From Molecules to Organisms: An Investigative approach to
the Developmental Biology Laboratory. Reno: Bent Tree Press. (Appendix IV).
Textbook Review
• Kuby Immunology 7 th edition W. H. Freeman Publisher (2010).
Research Trainees (12 students)
• Annia Martial (BL 490E), “Incidence of illness in function of eating and exercising habits and
incidence of recovery in function of medical and/or spiritual assistance in the Regis College
student population”. Fall 2006.
• Chelsea Ruller (BL 490E), “Pax-6 and β-catenin proteins expressions in developing chick
embryos using Western blot analysis”. Spring 2007.
• Claire Birkenheuer, Alexander Colgan, Sohayla Hadjimaleki and Crystal Kay (BL491E),
“Expression of developmental genes in developing and adult Drosophila melanogaster using RT-
PCR. Spring 2008.
• Nicolette Mineo (BL491E), “Development and maintenance of a sea urchin colony for the purpose
of fertilization”. Fall 2010.
14
• Jeffrey Hassebrock and Alexandra Lynch (BL491E), “Expression of pair-ruled protein in
developing and adult Drosophila melanogaster”. Spring 2011. (Appendix VI).
• Nicolette Mineo (BL491F), “Development and maintenance of a sea urchin colony for the purpose
of fertilization continued”. Spring 2011.
• Meghan Moroze (BL491E), Immunocytochemistry of the actin protein expression in developing
sea urchin embryos”. Spring 2011. (Appendix VII).
• Genevieve Go (BL491E), Expression of the Hairy protein in developing and adult Drosophila
melanogaster using fluorescent immunocytochemistry: Spring 2012. (Appendix VIII).
Grants
• Faculty Development Committee Small Grants, about $300.00 each. (2007, 2008, 2010).
• SPARC faculty grant for $4,519.74. (2007). (Appendix IX).
• Core Faculty Development Grant for $500.00. (2008).
• Tribeta Scholarship grant to Alexandra Lynch (BL491E, Franco Advisor) for $471.00 for her
research project “Indirect Immunofluorescence to Investigate the Role of Hairy Protein, Encoded
by a Pair-Rule Gene, in the Development of the Central Nervous System in Drosophila
melanogaster”. (2011). Tribeta is the National Biological Honor Society. (Appendix VI).
• Student SPARC grant to Meghan Moroze (BL491E, Franco Advisor) for $ 472.55 for her research
project “Immunocytochemical Analysis of the Fascin Protein Expression as a Tool to Investigate
Changes in Microvillar Expression in Developing Sea Urchin Embryos”. (2011). (Appendix VII).
Professional Conferences
• Presentation of newly published laboratory manual. Franco, Marie-dominique (2009) From
Molecules to Organisms: An Investigative approach to the Developmental Biology Laboratory.
Reno: Bent Tree Press at the 67 th meeting of the Society for Developmental Biology, Philadelphia,
PA., July 2008.
• Campisi, J, Franco, MD, Betz, JL, Ghedotti, MJ, Penheiter, K, Sakulich, J, Kleier, C. TBL in a
Biomedical Sciences M.S. Program: Student & Faculty Perceptions of Learning & Group Work.
Team-Based Learning Collaborative Annual TBL conference in Higher Education in St.
Petersburg, FL, March, 2012.
• Genevieve Go*, Alexandra Lynch*, Jeffrey Hassebrock* & Marie-Dominique Franco.
Investigating the Role of Hairy Protein in the Development of the Central Nervous System in
Drosophila melanogaster. TriBeta Biological Honor Society, District Convention Conference,
Alamosa, CO March 2012. * refers to students enrolled in BL491 (Undergraduate Research in
Biology). (Appendix VIII).
• Campisi, J, Franco, MD, Shamieh, LS, Badtke, M, Penheiter, K. Integrating Graduate Biomedical
Courses Through a Common TBL Experience. Team-Based Learning Collaborative Annual
Conference. (Presented at the annual TBL conference in Higher Education in San Diego, CA,
March, 2013).
Professional Associations Memberships
• Society for Developmental Biology
• Society for Applied Anthropology
B. Self-Evaluation of Research and Professional Activities
As already stated, my most noticeable accomplishments as it relates to the scholarship of
discovery occurred before I became Chair of the Biology Department. Although it was a challenge to
maintain an active research program while Chair, I continued to train students in developmental biology
15
ut focused my scholarship on developing and implementing exciting and cutting-edge TBL problems for
my genetics courses (undergraduate and graduate levels). The work on integrative TBL activities with my
colleagues from the Biology Department for the M.S. in Biomedical Sciences was presented at 2 TBL
Collaborative conferences.
After receiving tenure in the Spring of 2007, I started to slightly redirect my research program in
developmental biology in preparation for my sabbatical leave in the Spring of 2008. While my overall
research investigates gene and protein expression in developing embryos and adulthood, most of my work
had focused on investigating the pattern of expression of olfactory receptor genes and proteins in 2 model
organisms; the tobacco hawk moth Manduca sexta and the African clawed frog Xenopus laevis. I had
published several peer-reviewed articles and presented my work at many professional conferences,
sometimes accompanied by students who received awards. In preparation for my sabbatical project
centered on developing, performing and writing experiments to be included into the developmental
biology manual I published, I started to research trends in the field and expanded my research scope. In
particular, I began to explore expression of the so-called “developmental genes” in the fruit fly,
Drosophila melanogaster. These genes belong to 5 different categories, all reported to be expressed in
the developing embryos to specify the fate of the cells in which they are expressed. Surprisingly, my
students (4 undergraduate research students) and I found that some of those genes (pair-rule genes) were
also expressed in adulthood, a stage for which they currently have no defined function. Selected
experiments were included into the laboratory manual and once published; I recruited additional research
students to further investigate this discovery and particularly looked at the corresponding Pair-rule
proteins’ patterns of expression. We found that the proteins are specifically expressed in the developing
nervous system much later than anticipated. Because of my other duties, I have not had the time to
further pursue and publish these data, but I intend on doing so in these coming years.
The publication of the developmental biology laboratory manual was my first work in the category
of the scholarship of teaching and I have since developed this scholarship by introducing and developing
TBL activities in most of my courses as discussed earlier. My colleagues from the Biology Department
and I were approached by Dr. Wayne McCormack (TBL Collaborative Presidents) while presenting our
work at the last TBL Collaborative conference and invited to publish our work in a peer-reviewed journal.
Much is still needed as it pertains to data collection because our sample is relatively small but with our
new master class of 29 students (Fall 2013), I believe we will be able to obtain additional data and do a
final analysis.
C. Long-Term Research and Professional Goals
With the ultimate goal of educating students in scholarship, in light of the Regis University
Mission Statement, I will continue to develop and implement scholarly projects to better serve my
students and the community. I intend to continue my Developmental Biology scholarship of discovery by
seeking durable collaboration with faculty from Metropolitan State University, Department of Biology,
especially Dr. Joanne Odden who advised me on the Drosophila melanogaster data and the University of
Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Department of Cell and Developmental Biology, especially Dr.
Joan Hooper with whom I had starting conversing about these data. In addition to the TBL projects I
have already initiated and implemented, I intend to continue my scholarship of teaching by writing a
laboratory manual for my undergraduate genetics course during my next sabbatical leave scheduled for
Fall 2014. I have learned much about the process while publishing my Developmental Biology laboratory
manual and feel confident I will be able to generate a product that will be of high academic quality and at
the same time engaging for students.
16
V. Service to the University, including Service to the Student Body
A. Service Activities
Over the past 7-year period, my service activities were diverse as reported below, even though most of
them became focused on the Biology Department when I became Chair and remained so for the last 4
years (see Appendix X for the last Biology Annual Report). Indeed, the Biology Department went
through a lot of productive changes (as mentioned earlier) and while I do not claim them all, I managed
most of them, coordinated the totality of a large and very active department’s activities, and handled the
many departmental crises that inevitably arise when necessary. Overall, I enjoyed all tasks and felt that
my opinions were taken into consideration during decision-making. I would like to mention that I always
participated in meetings’ and committees’ discussions even if I was not part of the executive boards, e.g.,
Senate Plenary Meetings. Because I believe Regis College is an open and caring community where
opinions are not only sough after but respected, I always felt I could voice mine without being censured.
In addition, I would also like to mention, even if this does not fall into any particular category, that I
always help staff, faculty and students in any way I could when in need of assistance.
Specific Service to the Student Body (most is embedded in the other categories)
• Ranger Preview Day, Biology representative. (2007).
• Advised an average of 24 Biology students per year with an apex year of 30 students in 2008-2009
(number that equals the lowest number that will qualify for extraordinary service), the number of
students to advise grew tremendously as more of them declared Biology major. (2006-2013).
• Wrote countless letters of recommendation for students applying to Medical Schools, Graduate
Schools, Physician Assistant School, Physical Therapy Schools and other professional schools,
most students were accepted. (2006-2013).
• Wrote many letters of recommendations for students applying for Internship, Research Positions,
Honors Societies and such, most were accepted. (2006-2013).
• Honors Thesis Advisor for 6 students, Joanna Welch, Sid White, Emmie Altepeter, Jeffrey
Hassebrock, Alexandra Lynch and Sonny Stoen. (2006-07, 2009-10, 2011-12, 2012-13).
• Honors Thesis Reader for 3 students, Erika Tanaka, Lana Schamberger and Alexander Ghincea. I
really served as Erika’s Advisor because her Reader was not involved. (2009-10, 2011-12).
Service to the Community and Regis University
• Magis National Faculty Retreat, Fairfield University, CT. (2007).
• Regis University Institutional Review Board committee (IRB). (2006, 2007, 2008).
• Budget and Facilities Committee. (2007, 2008, 2009).
• Mentored the two first exchange students from Brazil (rides, meals and such). (2006, 2007).
• Faculty representative for the development and implementation of a Community Garden on
campus (members of this committee were composed of Physical Plant, student, faculty and DUG
representatives). (2008-2009).
• Nominated for the National Society of Collegiate Scholars (NSCS). (2009).
• Member of an ad hoc committee appointed by Janet House, Dean of RHCHP to assess the
feasibility of developing a M.S. in Clinical Sciences in collaboration with the Colorado Center for
Medical Laboratory Science sponsored by the Colorado Health Foundation. (2010-2011).
• Provided research information for an article on frogs published in National Geographic Kids
magazine. (2012).
• Participated in the CU’s Graduate Teacher and Preparing Future Faculty program organized by Dr.
Sagendorf, one of the graduate students I met stayed in contact with me, will give a seminar in the
Biology Seminar Series this coming Fall and is interested in teaching in the Biology Department.
(2012).
17
• Member of the Regis Faculty Leader Committee as a sub-committee of the Search Committee for
Regis University President appointed by the Vice President for Academic Affair Dr. Ladewig,
lunch and dinner with Father Fitzgibbons. (2011-2012).
Service to Regis College
• Summer Advising. This task became financially remunerated in 2010. (2007-2013).
• Regis Chapter of AAUP, member at-large. (2006-2008).
• Outstanding Faculty Member Award for the exceptional support of the Collegium Musicum at
Regis University. (2007).
• Search Committee member for the Assistant/Associate Advising Dean, the position was filled. Dr.
Atkins was hired in 2007. (2006-2007).
• Interview Committee member for the Music Theory Tenure-Track position, the position was
filled. Dr. Notareschi was hired. (2006-2007).
• Interview Committee member for one Religious Studies Tenure-Track position, the position was
filled. Dr. Balani was hired. (2007).
• Wrote a 2-page summary of my experience as a foreign educator in the U.S. that was used as an
excerpt in the book “Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Exceptional Students: Strategies for
Teaching and Assessment” by Elizabeth Grassi and Heidi Barker published in 2009. (2007).
• Helped in the translation from English to French of texts used for a Religious Conference held at
Regis University. (2006).
• Search Committee member for one Assistant tenure-track position in Psychology, the position was
filled. Dr. Basham was hired in 2007. (2006).
• Attended Faculty Forum and later Faculty Senate sessions on a regular basis. (2006-2013).
• Member of COTER (Committee on Teacher Education at Regis), the committee meets twice a
year to discuss the College policies on admission, retention, and recommendation for licensure.
(2007-2013).
• Member of the Neuroscience Advising Committee. (2009-2011).
• Member for the Student Life Committee (met as a committee and interviewed student-athletes).
(2008-2010).
• Admission Open Houses and Breakfasts, usually 3 events a year meeting with students and
parents. (2006-2013).
• Wrote letter to support the hire of a second Physicist to the Dean of the College Dr. Ewald, the
proposal went through and Dr. Hart was hired in 2010. (2009).
• Worked in close relation with the newly designed University Relations to improve communication
between academics and administrative offices. (2010).
• Worked with Dr. Barnes from Physical Therapy to continue an already established collaboration
between our departments, especially concerning the cadaver anatomy laboratory. (2009-20011).
• Informally mentored Dr.Tong, Chemistry faculty for 2 years, Dr. Tong accepted a position in
Canada since. (2011-2012).
• Nominated for faculty of the year but declined the nomination (2012).
• Developed a working collaboration with Sarah Behuneck, new Assistant Vice President, Alumni
Engagement Program. A survey to biology majors was sent out for the first time in many years
(2011-2010).
• Member of the Regis College Assessment Committee and piloted the Biology Portfolio
Assessment with Dr. Sakulich. (2012-2013).
• Member of the Study Abroad AUR Committee. (2012-2013).
18
• Member of the ad hoc committee appointed by the Dean of the College Dr. Ewald to review the
Communication Department and make recommendation for its future. (2013).
Service to the Biology Department
• Advised an average of 24 Biology students per year with an apex year of 30 students in 2008-2009
(number that equals the lowest number that will qualify for extraordinary service), the number of
students to advise grew tremendously as more of them declared Biology major. (2006-2013).
• Wrote countless letters of recommendation for students applying to Medical Schools, Graduate
Schools, Physician Assistant School, Physical Therapy Schools and other professional schools,
most students were accepted. (2006-2013).
• Wrote many letters of recommendations for students applying for Internship, Research Positions,
Honors Societies and such, most were accepted. (2006-2013).
• Met with prospective athletes and biology majors, with and without parents. (2006-2013).
• Informally tutored many struggling biology students. (2006-2013).
• Actively participated in the writing of 2 AURs, the first in 2007 by compiling and analyzing
various alumni databases and the second in 2011 (Dr. Ghedotti did most of everything for those).
• Key participant in the discussions concerning the remodeling of the Science Building and actively
participated in the general move/storage of supplies and furniture to the many allocated locations
pending the remodeling. (2006-2007).
• Biology Scholarship Week-ends, proctored exams, attended socials with students and parents and
compile data for winners selection. (2006-2013).
• Search Committee member for an Assistant tenure-track Microbiologist position, the position was
filed and Kristi Penheiter was hired. (2008).
• Created and initially maintained Facebook pages for the Biology alumni in an effort to gather
information and generate a community. (2010).
• Search Committee member for an Assistant tenure-track Primate Behaviorist position, the position
was filed and Amy Schreier was hired. (2012).
• Search Committee member for an Assistant tenure-track Environmental Ecology position, the
position was filed and John Sakulich was hired. (2010).
• Search Committee Chair for 2 Biologist Assistant tenure-track positions, all positions were filled.
Jay Campisi was hired in 2009 and Lara Shamieh was hired in 2012.
• Master of Science in Biomedical Science Curriculum Committee. (2010-2013).
• Worked closely with Lisa Greco, Creative Lead in University Brand marketing to generate
promotional brochures for the undergraduate Biology programs and the M.S. in Biomedical
Sciences. (2009-2012).
• Tribeta (National Biological Honor Society) Advisor. (2011-2012).
• AED (Alpha Epsilon Delta, Premedical Honor Society) Advisor. (2011-2012).
• Chair of Search Committee for a Biology Coordinator Position, the position was filled. Alice
Young was hired in 2010. (2009).
• Developed a semi-formal collaboration with Valerie Saltou, Postdoctoral Coordinator, CU Denver
and met with Dr. John Freed, former Dean of the Graduate School for the recruitment of
outstanding adjuncts. I am planning in making this collaboration formal as explained later. (2009-
1013).
• Chair of Search Committee for a Laboratory Preparator, the position was filled. Kate Gould was
hired. (2010).
• Chair of Search Committee for an Application Processing Assistant for the M.S. in Biomedical
Sciences, the position was filled. Kara Sakulich was hired in 2010. (2010).
19
• Chair of all Search Committees for all Biology Adjunct positions, all positions were filled
(average of 9 Adjuncts per semester, many became regular Adjuncts). (2009-2013).
• Chair of the Biology Department. (2009-2013). In addition to the normal Chair duties (Regis
College Faculty Handbook, 2013), I have created what I called the A-Z Biology Chair list of
duties that although non-exhaustive, captures the most important tasks to be done in a given year.
Since our Department is so big and since a lot of what the Chair does is dealing with everyday
operations and crises that come around (and they do), I had started to delegate some of the duties
as represented in the list that follows. It will not come as a surprise that Dr. Ghedotti gets his own
special column; so much of what we are has been defined by his work.
• Acting Program Director for the M.S. in Biomedical Sciences while Dr. Betz was on sabbatical
leave (Fall 2012).
• M.S. capstone project Advisor for 9 students. (2012-2013).
20
B. Self-Evaluation of Service Activities
Over this 7-year period, I have been very active and was involved in many service activities. Although
it is very difficult to measure energy and time spent daily with the affairs of running a department, I
would say that this charge has been like the glue that holds pieces together and permeated most of my
days after I became Chair. I believed I reached the peak of my activities this past academic year (2012-
2013) with the following activities being the highlights. Indeed, I was Chair of the Biology Department
(see appendix X for the Biology annual report), Acting Director for the M.S. in Biomedical Sciences in
the Fall 2012, was the Honors Thesis Advisor for 3 students, developed the new Experiential Learning
program (students presented very high quality work), was a member of the ad hoc committee appointed
by the Dean of the College Dr. Ewald to review the Communication Department and make
recommendation for its future, moved Portfolio assessment forward in the Biology Department and
developed a new collaboration with the Alumni Engagement Programs (Assistant Vice President, Sarah
Behuneck and Director, Kate Paquette). I am particularly happy with the latter accomplishment because I
started this project in 2007 while the department was writing one of its AURs and struggled over the years
to obtain accurate information. After many unsuccessful attempts to obtain alumni data, this year and
with the collaboration of Alice Young (Biology Administrative Coordinator), Sarah and Kate, we
developed an online survey that was sent out to the last four graduating classes; Figure 1 reports the
occupations of these alumni. This data will help us put forward our strategic planning.
Figure 1: Summary of the professional activities of the Biology alumni for the past four years.
The survey was sent to 117 Biology alumni and we
received 45 responses as of, May 14, 2013 (more
answers have been received since but need to be
analyzed, overall the trend remained the same). The
collected data has been analyzed and shows that 62%
of the students are currently enrolled in graduate
schools (Medical, DO, Dental, Veterinary, PA,
Pharmacy, Sciences and Chiropractic schools), 29% of
the students have a professional occupation (79% with
a Biology focus) and 9% of the students are currently
Sciences). These numbers are very encouraging and
demonstrate that the Biology Department is doing a
very good work at training Biologists, not only at
graduating students with a college degree.
C. Long-Term Service Goals
I intend to remain actively involved in service to the Biology Department, the College, the
University and the community at-large. The most pressing activity will be to finish the compilation and
analysis of the alumni data collected this past Spring 2013 and to develop a long-term plan for assessing
the data. Also, I intend to remain the Chair of Adjuncts Searches and would like to formalize the
collaboration I have established with Valerie Saltou, Postdoctoral Coordinator at CU Denver (UCD). We
had discussed the possibility of entering into agreement with the UCD Postdoctoral Teaching and
Mentoring Exchange (PTME), designed to assist UCD’s Postdoctoral Fellows/Trainees to obtain teaching
and/or mentoring experience and help strengthen their academic portfolio. In addition, I would like to
develop some relationship between my Diversity Core Seminar (RCC400D), the Experiential Learning
program and the local community. More specifically, I would like to connect them by developing student
projects with the local community that will enhance students’ concern for Biology-related public issues
and foster their leadership and advocacy.
21
VI. Summary and Concluding Statement
I believe that my post tenure 7-year period was successful in the areas of teaching, scholarship and
service. Based on personal observations and reflections and based on students’ evaluations, I feel my
teaching effectiveness has reached a level at which I consider myself an effective instructor in all the
courses I have taught. I attribute this achievement to my genuine desire to continually improve the quality
of my teaching and to my dedication to the student body. My most significant achievements were: 1) the
improvement and design (for BL261H) of the Molecular and Cellular Biology lecture and laboratory
courses (BL260, BL261 and BL261H). These courses represented half my teaching load each year (for
many years before I started to teach genetics), 2) the development of all genetics lecture courses (graduate
and undergraduate) (BL 414, BL414H and BL614). These courses are central to the Biology and the
Biomedical Sciences M.S. curricula and I feel that the quality of my instruction well prepares students for
their future academic careers, 3) the redesign of the Junior Core Seminar (CCS 400) into the Diversity and
Cultural Tradition Core Seminar (RCC400D) and 4) the supervision of numerous Honors theses.
Concerning my scholarship activities as they relate to the scholarship of discovery, I feel that I have been
successful in developing and implementing a research program centered on patterns of gene expression
during organismic development (Developmental Biology), in collaboration with undergraduate Regis
students. Indeed, this program had led to students’ grants and scholarly presentation. In addition, I have
started to engage in new types of scholarship, scholarship of teaching and scholarship of application
demonstrated by my involvement in TBL
scholarship presentations and my publication of
a Developmental Biology Laboratory Manual
respectively. I intend to repeat the Laboratory
Manual Publication experience with the
Genetics Laboratory course (BL415).
Concerning my service activities, I believe that
I have also been successful; from departmental
service (including extended-term Chairship) to
University-wide service, my activities have
been numerous and diverse. I plan to continue
my engagement in service in the future and I
look forward to become more involved at the
College level now that my Chair term is over.
In sum, I believe I have been able to bring
together my teaching, scholarship and service,
in light of the Regis University Mission. This
accomplishment has required deep personal
analysis, reflection and refocusing. I am very
grateful that I am part of an academic institution
that not only values academic excellence but
also personal growth.
I would like to finish this application
with one of the thank-you cards I received at
the end of last academic year. I recognize that
many of the dedicated faculty at Regis receive
similar notes from students, but I think it really
communicates why my work at Regis is where
my heart is.
22
VII. Curriculum vitae
23
APPENDIX Ia
Molecular and Cellular Biology Lecture (BL 260)
Spring 2011
MEETING TIME and PLACE
Lecture periods meet three times a week either in Pomponio Science Center
#212 on Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays from 11:30 am to 12:20 pm
(RU01), or in Pomponio Science Center #313 on Mondays, Wednesdays and
Fridays from 12:30 pm to 1:20 pm (RU02).
INSTRUCTOR
Dr. Marie-dominique Franco (Pomponio Science Center #223, mfranco@regis.edu). Laboratory course
(BL261 and BL261H) coordinator and lecture (BL260) instructor: Dr. Marie-dominique Franco (office
hours: Mondays 9:00 am to 11:30 am; Wednesdays 9:00 am to 11:30 am; Fridays 8:00 am to 9:00 am and
appointments).
TEACHING ASSISTANTS
Teaching assistants will conduct weekly tutoring/review sessions, that will be scheduled at the beginning
of the semester.
IMPORTANT DEADLINES
The Add/Drop period ends on January 25, and the withdrawal period ends on March 25.
COURSE WEB SITE (http://academic.regis.edu/mfranco/MCB/MolCellBio.htm)
To print a Power point lecture you will have to 1) Right click on the link to the lecture and select Save
Target As and save the file to your computer or disk, 2) Open the saved file in Power Point and select
Print from the File menu, and 3) Choose Handouts from the Print window and select the number of slides.
LECTURE MATERIALS
Weekly assigned readings will include appropriate sections from the textbook:
• Life: The Science of Biology 9 th Ed. by Savada, Hillis, Heller, and Berenbaum (2011), Ed. Sinauer
and Freeman (see schedule for assigned page numbers).
In addition, I recommend students with weak chemistry background to obtain the textbook:
• An Introduction to Chemistry for Biology Students 9 th Ed by G.I. Sackheim (2007), Ed. Benjamin
Cummings
COURSE DESCRIPTION and OBJECTIVES
This course will introduce students to Natural Science; particularly the hypothesis testing and data
analysis used in contemporary Molecular and Cellular Biology. In addition, this course will develop
student knowledge of the terms and concepts of Cell Biology, Genetics, and Molecular Biology, and will
also highlight social and ethical issues.
STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES
Students should be able to:
• Generally explain how science differs from other ways of knowing
• Define the major terms used in Cell Biology, Genetics, and Molecular Biology
• Explain the major organizing concepts in Cell Biology, Genetics, and Molecular Biology
31
• Recognize the social and ethical relevance of content covered in Genetics and Biotechnology
HOW TO STUDY FOR THIS COURSE
This course is an intensive first-year introductory Biology course that requires a lot of work. All topics
build on each other and you need to comprehend the early material in order to progress through the
course. In order to succeed in this course you need to:
• Read assigned textbook chapters before lecture periods
• Come to class with your printed PowerPoint lectures
• Ask questions in class if you don’t understand
• Spend a minimum of 3 hours of study time for 1 hour of lecture
• Work in group, quiz yourselves and do the exercises at the end of each chapter
If you realize that you still don’t understand, you need to come to me for explanations.
ATTENDANCE
Attendance is expected and will be taken on a daily basis, although you will not be penalized if you
miss classes. If you are a member of the NCAA athletic team and must miss either a quiz, or a home-work
exercise, or an exam (except the final exam), you must present me with an official schedule provided by
your coach during the first week of the semester. In addition, it is your responsibility to remind me a
week in advance that you will be missing either a quiz, or a home-work exercise, or an exam (except the
final exam). If you must miss a quiz, a home-work exercise, or an exam (except the final exam) for
medical or family emergency, you must notify me and provide an official letter of explanation. If I am
not provided with an official letter of explanation, your absence will be considered as unexcused. Neither
make-up quizzes, nor make-up home-work exercises, nor make-up exams will be given, therefore and for
all EXCUSED absences, your final grade will be calculating averaging tests you took, and home-work
you turned in. For all UNEXCUSED absences, any missed quizzes, or home-work exercises, or exams
will result in a “zero” grade.
Promptness is mandatory; any late coming will result in minus 10 points each from the grand total
points. Indeed, tardiness is not acceptable, as I need to start lecture in time in order to ensure in-time
ending of the period.
iClickers
iClickers will be used in class most (or all) class days to take attendance and ensure that students are
comprehending material as it is covered to help the instructor gauge student learning. Students must
register their iClicker online at http://www.iclicker.com by Monday January 24, 2011.
**** Bring your iClicker to class every day. *****
Use of Laptop Computers in Class
Studies have shown that use of laptops in class correlates with poor grades for the student AND for other
students able to see the screen. Thus, students may NOT use laptops or iPads to take notes in class (unless
it is a disability accommodation or granted special instructor permission).
ASSIGNMENTS and TESTS
• Exercises that will be started in class and allowed to be finished at home
• Quizzes (in class)
• Exams (comprehensive, in class)
MISSED AND LATE ASSIGNMENTS
All UNEXCUSED absences resulting in either a missed quiz, or a missed home-work exercise, or a
missed exam will result in a “zero” grade. For EXCUSED absences, and on a case-to-case basis, I may
32
eserve the right to allow an assignment to be turned in late (time extension will be determined also on a
case-to-case basis). No other late assignments will be accepted.
DISABILITY
If you have a documented disability requiring academic adjustments for this course, please contact the
Disability Services Office (303-458-4941, disability@regis.edu). The Disability Services office will
review your documentation with you and determine appropriate, reasonable accommodations. Following
the meeting with Disability Services personnel, please make an appointment with me to discuss your
accommodation request in light of the course requirement.
INNAPROPRIATE CONDUCT
Academic dishonesty such as cheating and plagiarism will be severely punished as it will result in the
failure of the course (grade F) and the offense will be reported to the Biology Department Chair and to the
Dean’s Office for documentation that could lead to expulsion from Regis College. The following is an
excerpt from the Regis College’s Academic Integrity Policy:
"Consistent with the College's Academic Integrity Policy, I will report all violations of this course's
academic integrity policy to the Dean's office. Students who have committed multiple instances of
academic dishonesty can be subject to institutional penalties like probation, suspension, or expulsion,
in addition to the penalties for this course. The Academic Integrity policy is described in the Bulletin;
detailed information about the policy and the appeals process can be found in the Dean's office."
Cell phones, pagers, and any other electronic devices should be turned off during class periods and
exams. Any use of such devices will result in minus 10 points each time from the grand total points. If
you need to be contacted for an emergency situation, you should notify me at the beginning of a class
period.
During testing periods, personal calculators will not be permitted, hat brims will need to be turned
backward and, and all personal items will be stored in the front of the room.
GRADING and POINTS DISTRIBUTION
Your final course grade will be assigned based on the percentage of points earned out of a total of 755
points. In addition, I may occasionally give pop quizzes. Each of them will be worth 5 points. All tests
(quizzes and exams) and home-work exercises are scheduled at the beginning of the semester; therefore
you need to make sure you will be on campus these days. Neither make-up quizzes, nor make-up homework
exercises, nor make-up exams will be given, therefore and for all EXCUSED absences, your final
grade will be calculating averaging tests you took, and home-work you turned in. For all UNEXCUSED
absences, any missed quizzes, or home-work exercises, or exams will result in a “zero” grade. All exams
are comprehensive.
Exercises
60 (6 x 10) points
Quizzes
100 (5 x 20) points
Exam I
100 points
Exam II
125 points
Exam III
150 points
Final exam
Assessment quiz
200 points
20 points
755 points
A 100-92.5 % A- 92.4-89.5 % B+ 89.4-85.5 %
B 85.4-82.5 % B- 82.4-79.5 % C+ 79.4-75.5 %
C 75.4-72.5 % C- 72.4-69.5 % D+ 69.4-65.5 %
D 65.4-62.5 % D- 62.4-59.5 % F
Date Topic and Reading Lab Topic
Wed. Jan. 19 Introduction to the Course and Assessment quiz (not graded)
Fri. Jan. 21 Small Molecules and the Chemistry of Life (pp. 20-37)
Metric system
Mon. Jan 24 Small Molecules and the Chemistry of Life (pp. 20-37) Solutions,
Wed. Jan 26 Small Molecules and Exercises on Small Molecules
Acids and
Fri. Jan. 28 Quiz1 on Small Molecules and Lecture on Macromolecules (pp. 38-75) Bases
Mon. Jan. 31 Macromolecules (pp. 38-75)
Macro-
Wed. Feb. 2 Macromolecules (pp. 38-75)
-molecules
Fri. Feb. 4 Exercises on Macromolecules
Mon. Feb. 7 Cells (pp. 76-104)
Wed. Feb. 9 Quiz2 on Macromolecules and Lecture on Cells (pp. 76-104)
Cells
Fri. Feb. 11 Review for Exam I
Mon. Feb. 14 Exam I
Diffusion and
Wed. Feb. 16 Cell Membranes (pp. 105-127)
Osmosis
Fri. Feb. 18 Energy, Enzymes, and Metabolism (pp. 148-167)
Mon. Feb. 21 Pathways that Harvest Chemical Energy (Cellular Respiration) (pp. 168-188)
Wed. Feb. 23 Pathways that Harvest Chemical Energy (Cellular Respiration) (pp. pp. 168-188) Enzymes
Fri. Feb. 25 Exercises on Pathways that Harvest Chemical Energy (Cellular Respiration)
Mon. Feb. 28 Photosynthesis (pp. 189-208)
Wed. Mar. 2 Quiz3 on Pathways and Lecture on Photosynthesis (pp. 189-208)
Fri. Mar. 4 Exercises on Photosynthesis
Mar. 7 th -11 th No Class: Spring Break Week
Mon. Mar. 14 Cell Cycle and Cell Division (pp. 209-235)
Wed. Mar. 16 Cell Cycle and Cell Division (pp. 209-235)
Fri. Mar. 18 Review for Exam II
Mon. Mar. 21 Exam II
Wed. Mar. 23 Genetics (pp. 236-265)
Fri. Mar. 25 Genetics (pp. 236-265)
Mon. Mar. 28 Genetics (pp. 236-265)
Wed. Mar. 30 Exercises on Genetics
Fri. Apr.1 DNA and its Role in Heredity (pp. 266-289)
Mon. Apr. 4 Quiz4 on Genetics and Lecture on DNA and its Role in Heredity (pp. 266-289)
Wed. Apr. 6 From DNA to Protein: Gene Expression Transcription (pp. 290-315)
Fri. Apr. 8 From DNA to Protein: Gene Expression Translation (pp. 290-315)
Mon. Apr. 11 Exercises on DNA and its Role in Heredity and From DNA to Proteins
Wed. Apr. 13 Review for Exam III
Fri. Apr. 15 Exam III
Mon. Apr. 18 Regulation of Gene Expression (pp. 342-364)
Wed. Apr. 20 Regulation of Gene Expression (pp. 342-364)
Fri. Apr. 22 No Class: Easter Break
Mon. Apr. 25 Quiz 5 on Regulation of Gene Expression and Lecture on Recombinant DNA
Wed. Apr. 27 Recombinant DNA and Biotechnology (pp. 386-404)
Fri. Apr. 29 Wrap-up and Review session for Final Exam
Final Exam (with assessment quiz) for RU01 is from 8:00 am to 10:00 am
Wed. May 4
Final Exam (with assessment quiz) for RU02 is from 10:10 am to 12:10 pm
Fri. May 6
Important note: In general, you will NOT be able to switch sections.
Cellular
Respiration
Photosynthesis
Mitosis and
Meiosis
Genetics
Restriction
Enzymes
Bacterial
Transformation
Independent
Projects
Independent
Projects
Independent
Projects
Presentation
34
APPENDIX Ib
Molecular and Cellular Biology laboratory (BL 261H)
Spring 2011
Seminar Part of the Course
MEETING TIME and PLACE
Laboratory sessions meet twice a week in Pomponio Science Center #206 on
Tuesdays from 9:25 am to 12:02 pm, and in Pomponio Science Center #319 on
Fridays from 9:30 am to 10:30 am.
IMPORTANT DEADLINES
The Add/Drop period ends on January 25, and the withdrawal period ends on March 25.
INSTRUCTOR
Dr. Marie-dominique Franco (Pomponio Science Center #223, mfranco@regis.edu). Laboratory course (BL261
and BL261H) coordinator and lecture (BL260) instructor: Dr. Marie-dominique Franco (office hours: Mondays
9:00 am to 11:30 am; Wednesdays 9:00 am to 11:30 am; Fridays 8:00 am to 9:00 am and appointments).
COURSE WEB SITE
http://academic.regis.edu/mfranco/MCB/MolCellBio.htm
LABORATORY MATERIALS
Weekly assigned readings will include appropriate sections from either/and:
• Endersby J. 2007. A Guinea Pig’s History of Biology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard press. 499 p.
• Various online articles or articles distributed in class.
COURSE DESCRIPTION and OBJECTIVES
For the experimental part of this course, students will be introduced to scientific study design, use of
primary literature, basic laboratory skills, data interpretation, and presentation of scientific results. These
exercises will be implemented through the performing of experiments, including DNA recombination,
designed to reinforce lecture content. Each laboratory session will start with about 15 minutes of
laboratory lecture, then students will perform experiments, and finally the results of the experiments will
be discussed.
For the seminar part of this course, the readings will explore biological topics in greater depth and link
these topics to broader academic themes.
STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES
Students should be able to:
• Generally explain how science differs from other ways of knowing
• Propose, design, and execute a simple but rigorous scientific study/investigation
• Analyze primary data to correctly test hypotheses in Molecular and Cellular Biology
• Compose a clear, concise, and accurate primary research paper
• Define the major terms used in Cell Biology, Genetics, and Molecular Biology
• Explain the major organizing concepts in Cell Biology, Genetics, and Molecular Biology
• Recognize the social and ethical relevance of content covered in Genetics and Biotechnology
ATTENDANCE
The seminar part of this course is a discussion-based; therefore attendance is required and will be taken during each
class period. If you miss two class periods without an official university-sanctioned or official emergency excuse,
35
your grade will be reduced by one letter grade and your grade will be reduced by an additional letter grade for each
absence beyond two.
Attendance is required; if you are a member of the NCAA athletic team and must miss a seminar period for an
athletic competition, you must present your instructor with an official schedule provided by your coach during the
first week of the semester and the penalty points will be waived. In addition, it is your responsibility to let your
instructor know that you will be missing a seminar period a week in advance; otherwise you will be penalized as
mentioned above. If you must miss a seminar period for medical or family emergency, you must notify your
instructor and provide an official letter of explanation; otherwise you will be penalized as mentioned above. There
are no make-up seminar periods for excused absences; you will be responsible for studying any missed material on
your own.
Promptness is mandatory; any late coming will result in minus 10 points each from the grand total points. Indeed,
tardiness is not acceptable, as your instructor needs to start discussion in time in order to ensure in-time ending of
the session.
COURSE PARTICIPATION
As a seminar course, it is a basic assumption that students will participate actively in discussions in class, as nonparticipation
disrupts the class dynamics, therefore participation will be monitored in class. Students who
consistently do not participate will have their final grade reduced by a letter grade at the end of the semester.
ASSIGNMENTS and TESTS
• Reading summaries (entry slips) will be completed before class each week and will be collected during class.
• Midterm examination
• Final examination
MISSED AND LATE ASSIGNMENTS
Any missed assignments will result in a “0” for the missed assignment unless you provide your instructor with an
official letter of explanation. If you provide your instructor with an official letter of explanation, a late assignment
will be accepted (time extension will be determined by your instructor on a case to case basis). No other late
assignment will be accepted.
INNAPROPRIATE CONDUCT
Academic dishonesty such as plagiarism and cheating will be severely punished as it will result in the failure of
the course (grade F) and the offense will be reported to the Biology Department Chair and to the Dean’s Office for
documentation that could lead to expulsion from Regis College (refer to the Regis University Bulletin for more
information).
Cell phones and pagers use (including text messaging) will result in minus 10 points each time from the grand
total points. Cell phones and pagers should be turned off. If you need to be contacted for an emergency situation,
you should notify your instructor at the beginning of the laboratory period.
DISABILITY
If you have a documented disability requiring academic adjustments for this course, please contact the Disability
Services Office (303-458-4941, disability@regis.edu). The Disability Services office will review your
documentation with you and determine appropriate, reasonable accommodations. Following the meeting with
Disability Services personnel, please make an appointment with your instructor to discuss your accommodation
request in light of the course requirement.
REGIS COLLEGE WRITING CENTER
The Writing Center is a free resource where Regis College students get immediate and personal feedback on their
writing and answers to questions about grammar, documentation, and formatting. Peer writing consultants help at
any point in the writing process, from brainstorming for ideas to organizing a draft to polishing the final version.
The Writing Center is a very popular service, so appointments are strongly recommended. Drop by Loyola 1 or call
(303) 458-4039 for more information.
36
GRADING
Seminar reading summaries are completed (typed) before class each week and will be collected during class.
Because of the diversity of the readings (book chapters, review articles, primary research articles and others) and
because of the variable amount of readings per week, the specific format of the entry slip will not be uniform across
the semester. I will let you know in advance how to specifically write your entry slip. However, for all entry slips,
the following sections will have to be completed and will be graded as described below:
BL261H, Entry Slip “corresponding number”
“Your name”
Citation: Example: Durski JM, Weigel RJ, and McDougall IR (2000). Recombinant human thyrotropin (rhTSH)
in the management of differentiated thyroid cancer. Nuclear Medicine Communications. 21:521-528.
Summary:
Write a brief summary (2-3 paragraphs) of the reading/s. This section will vary according to the type and amount
of readings. I will let you know in advance how to write the summary.
Questions:
Write 3 questions/opinions based on the reading/s using bullet format.
Points allocations: 3 points for the citation/s, 13 points for the summary/ies, and 4 points for the questions (20
points total per entry slip). In addition, 20% penalty points will be removed for each direct quote. You will have
up to four articles per week. In this case, write 4 mini Entry slips, the points will be divided accordingly. Note: All
ESs need to be electronically turned in to TurnItIn in addition to be turned in printed.
Examinations are designed to assess if students have learned the seminar course material and to serve as means
to encourage students to revisit and synthesize the material covered previously in the course. I will give you
possible essay questions in advance. During the examinations (midterm and final), one or two of these questions
will be randomly selected as examinations questions.
Points Distribution
Your final grade for the seminar part of this course will be assigned based on the percentage of points earned out of
a total of 350 points as described below. In addition, I may give occasional pop quizzes (5 points each) that will be
added as bonus points.
Entry slips
Midterm examination
Final examination
200 points (10 x 20 points)
50 points
100 points
Penalty points (deducted from the final grade)
Attendance
One letter grade per two unexcused absences and an additional letter grade for each additional unexcused absence.
Participation
One letter grade removed from your final grade if non-participation is constant.
TurnItIn
Entry slips will not be graded if not submitted to TurnItIn.
FINAL GRADE FOR BL261H (Experimental and Seminar parts)
The final grades received in both the experimental and seminar parts of this course will be averaged at the end of
the semester; the averaged grade will constitute the final grade for BL261H course.
Grading Scale
A 100-92.5 % A - 92.4-89.5 % B+ 89.4-85.5 % B- 85.4-82.5 %
B - 82.4-79.5 % C+ 79.4-75.5 % C 75.4-72.5 % C - 72.4-69.5 %
D+ 69.4-65.5 % D 65.4-62.5 % D - 62.4-59.5 % F
Date Seminar Topic and Reading Assignment Due
1- Fri. Jan. 21
1. Endersby J. (2007). A Guinea Pig’s History of Biology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard press. Chapter 12: OncoMouse®.
2. Hanahan D, Wagner EF, and Palmiter RD. (2007). The Origins of oncomice: a history of the first transgenic mice genetically
engineered to develop cancer. Genes and Development. 21:2258-2270. (article will be distributed in class)
2- Fri. Jan. 28
1. Durski JM, Weigel RJ, and McDougall IR (2000). Recombinant human thyrotropin (rhTSH) in the management of differentiated
Entry slip 1
thyroid cancer. Nuclear Medicine Communications. 21:521-528. (print this article from the Medline database accessible from the
(TurnItIn and print)
DML website)
3- Fri. Feb. 4
1. Ingram VM. (1956). A Specific Chemical Difference between the Globins of Normal Human and Sickle-Cell Anemia haemoglobin.
Nature. 178:792-794. (article will be distributed in class)
2. Allison, AC. (2004). Two Lessons From the Interface of Genetics and Medicine. Genetics. 166:1591-1599. (print this article from
Google Scholar)
3. Carroll SB. (2009). Into the Jungle: Great adventures in the search for evolution. San Francisco, CA: Pearson Benjamin Cummings.
Chapter 8: A Sickle-Cell Safari. (chapter will be distributed in class)
4- Fri. Feb. 11 Laboratory Activity
1. Fujimoto K. (1995). Freeze-fracture replica electron microscopy combined with SDS digestion for cytochemical labeling of integral
5- Fri. Feb. 18 membrane proteins. Application to the immunogold labeling of intercellular junctional complexes. Journal of Cell Science.
108:3443-3449. (print this article from Google Scholar)
1. Adam M. (2005). Integrating research and development: the emergence of rational drug design in the pharmaceutical industry.
6- Fri. Feb. 25 Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences.
36(3): 513-537. (print this article from the Medline database accessible from the DML website)
1. Abuissa H, Jones PG, Marso SP, and O’Keefe JH. (2005). Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors or Angiotensin Receptor
7- Fri. Mar. 4 Blockers for Prevention of Type 2 Diabetes. Journal of the American College of Cardiology. 46:821-826. (print this article from the
Medline database accessible from the DML website)
Fri. Mar. 11
No Class: Spring Break
8- Fri. Mar. 18 Midterm Examination
1. Endersby J. (2007). A Guinea Pig’s History of Biology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard press. Chapter 4: Hieracium auricula, What
9- Fri. Mar. 25
Mendel did next. (bring your book)
1. Endersby J. (2007). A Guinea Pig’s History of Biology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard press. Chapter 8: Bacteriophage, The virus that
10- Fri. Apr. 1
revealed DNA. (bring your book)
1. Maddox B. 2003. The double helix and the “wronged heroine”. Nature. 421:407-408. (print this article from the Medline database
accessible from the DML website)
2. Franklin R and Gosling RG. (1953). Molecular Configuration in Sodium Thymonucleate. Nature. 171:740-741. (print this article
from the Medline database accessible from the DML website)
11- Fri. Apr. 8
3. Franklin R and Gosling RG. (1953). The Structure of Sodium Thymonucleate Fibres. I. The Influence of Water Content. Acta
Crystallographica. 6:673-677. (print this article from Google Scholar)
4. Watson JD, and Crick FHC. (1953). Genetical Implications of the Structure of Deoxyribonucleic Acid. Nature. 171:964-969. (article
will be distributed in class)
1. Mullis K, Faloona F, Scharf S, Saiki R, Horn G, and Erlich H. (1986). Specific enzymatic amplification of DNA in vitro: the
12- Fri. Apr. 15
polymerase chain reaction. Cold Spring Harb Symp Quant Biol. 51:263-73. (article will be distributed in class)
Fri. Apr. 22
No Class: Easter Break
1. Food from Genetically Modified Crops. (print brochure “from http://www.sdcma.org/education.html” under the Publications tab)
13- Fri. Apr. 29 2. Biotechnology and the Poor. (print brochure “from http://www.sdcma.org/education.html” under the Publications tab)
3. Agricultural Ethics. (print brochure “from http://www.sdcma.org/education.html” under the Publications tab)
F. May 2 Final Examination from 8:00 am to 10:00 am
Entry slip 2
(TurnItIn and print)
Entry slip 3
(TurnItIn and print)
Entry slip 4
(TurnItIn and print)
Entry slip 5
(TurnItIn and print)
Entry slip 6
(TurnItIn and print)
Entry slip 7
(TurnItIn and print)
Entry slip 8
(TurnItIn and print)
Entry slip 9
(TurnItIn and print)
Entry slip 10
(TurnItIn and print)
38
APPENDIX Ic
Developmental Biology Lecture BL 412, Fall 2009
Dr. Marie-dominique Franco
Department of Biology Room #223; Tel: 303-458-4198; mfranco@regis.edu
Office hours: Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays from 8:00 to 10:00 am, and by appointments. Note: All e-
mail communications will be sent to your Regis account.
Course website: http://academic.regis.edu/mfranco/devbio/devbio.htm
Withdrawal deadline: October 30, 2009.
MEETING TIME
Lecture sessions meet three times a week on Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays from 1:30 pm to 2:20 pm in
Loyola Hall room #14.
COURSE WEB SITE
You can find the Power Point lectures and other relevant information at the address printed below. To print a
Power Point lecture you will have to 1) right click on the link to the lecture, select “Save Target As” and save
the file to your computer or disk, 2) open the saved file in Power Point and select “Print” from the “File” menu,
and 3) choose “Handouts” from the “Print” window and select the number of slides per page.
http://academic.regis.edu/mfranco/devbio/devbio.htm.
COURSE DESCRIPTION/GOALS
This course explores the fundamental principles of Developmental Biology by investigating organismal,
cellular, genetic and molecular aspects of development in a variety of invertebrate and vertebrate models
organisms (sea urchins, the nematode C. elegans, the fruit fly D. melanogaster, amphibians, birds, and mice)
and also in humans. The principles for current knowledge of the developmental processes will be presented
using both normal and disease systems. A particular emphasis will be given to the scientific method, including
experimental techniques/designs and data analysis. Students are expected to know the material presented in the
Principles of Biology: Molecular and Cellular Biology lecture and laboratory courses (BL260 and BL261).
COURSE LEARNING OUTCOMES
a) To use biological content presented in the Principles of Biology: Molecular and Cellular Biology
courses
b) To define the major terms used in Developmental Biology
c) To understand and explain the fundamental mechanisms leading to the development of mature
organisms
d) To compare and contrast the relevance and use of model organisms
e) To analyze scientific data generating using various techniques
READING
Weekly assigned reading will include appropriate sections of the textbook, Gilbert, S.F. 2006. Developmental
Biology 8 th ed. Sunderland: Sinauer Associates Inc., and from the Power Point lecture notes that will be
available to you on the course web site. These lecture notes will be posted before the lecture sessions to allow
you to review the material. Please bring a printed version of the notes in class for addition of your personal
notes. Also, I will provide handouts and papers for specific topics when necessary.
HOW TO STUDY FOR THIS COURSE
This course is an in-depth upper division course that requires a lot of work. All topics build on each other and
you need to comprehend the early material in order to follow. In order to succeed in this course you need to:
• Read assigned chapters before lecture sessions
39
• Come to class with your printed PowerPoint lecture notes
• Ask questions in class if you don’t understand
• Spend a minimum of 3 hours of study time for 1 hour of lecture
• Work in group and quiz yourselves. If you still don’t understand, you need to ask for explanations
ATTENDANCE
Attendance is required, although you will not be penalized if you miss class on occasional times. If you are a
member of the NCAA athletic team and must miss either quizzes or exams for an athletic competition, you must
present me with an official schedule provided by your coach during the first week of the semester. If you must
miss either quizzes or exams for medical or family emergency, you must notify me and provide an official letter
of explanation. There are no make-up quizzes or exams for excused (NCAA or emergency) missed ones; your
final grade will be calculated averaging the quizzes and exams you took. However any unexcused missed
quizzes or exams will result in a 0 grade.
DISABILITY
If you have a documented disability requiring academic adjustments for this course, please contact the Disability
Services Office (303-458-4941, disability@regis.edu). The Disability Services office will review your
documentation with you and determine appropriate, reasonable accommodations. Following the meeting with
Disability Services personnel, please make an appointment with me to discuss your accommodation request in
light of the course requirement.
INNAPROPRIATE ACADEMIC CONDUCT
Academic dishonesty such as cheating and plagiarism will be severely punished as it will result in the failure
of the course (grade F) and the offense will be reported to the Biology Department Chair and to the Dean’s
Office for documentation that could lead to expulsion from Regis College. The following is an excerpt form the
Regis College’s Academic Integrity Policy:
"Consistent with the College's Academic Integrity Policy, I will report all violations of this course's
academic integrity policy to the Dean's office. Students who have committed multiple instances of academic
dishonesty can be subject to institutional penalties like probation, suspension, or expulsion, in addition to
the penalties for this course. The Academic Integrity policy is described in the Bulletin; detailed information
about the policy and the appeals process can be found in the Dean's office."
Cell phones, pagers, and any other electronic devices should be turned off during class periods and exams.
Any use of such devices will result in minus 10 points each time from the grand total points. If you need to be
contacted for an emergency situation, you should notify me at the beginning of a class period.
During testing periods, personal calculators will not be permitted, hat brims will need to be turned backward
and, all personal items will be stored in the front of the room.
GRADING
Your final course grade will be assigned based on the percentage of points earned out of a total of 695 points. In
addition, I may occasionally give pop quizzes. Each of them will be worth a certain amount of points, to be
determined at the end of the course. All the exams, quizzes, and exercises are scheduled at the beginning of the
semester; therefore you need to make sure you will be on campus these days. There will be no make-up quizzes
or exams; any missed quiz, exam, or exercises will result in 0 for this particular test. All exams are
comprehensive. If you must miss a quiz or exam for either athletic competition or medical emergency or family
emergency, you must provide an official letter of explanation within a week of the scheduled test.
Quizzes
80 points (4 including the assessment quiz x 20 points)
Exercises
40 points (2 x 20 points)
Exam I
100 points
Exam II (comprehensive) 125 points
Exam III (comprehensive) 150 points
Final Exam (comprehensive) 200 points
Total -------------
695 points
40
Date
Lecture Topic and Reading
I- Principles of Developmental Biology
M Aug. 24 Introduction to the Course, Assessment Quiz, and “From Egg to Tadpole” video
W Aug. 26 Developmental Biology: The Anatomical Tradition (pp. 3-24)
F Aug. 28 Life Cycles and the Evolution of Developmental Patterns (pp. 25-47)
M Aug. 31 Principles of Experimental Embryology I (pp. 49-75)
W Sep. 02 Principles of Experimental Embryology II (pp. 49-75) and Class Review 1
F Sep. 04 Quiz 1 (Life Cycles and Exp. Biology) and The Genetic Core of Development I (pp. 77-99)
M Sep. 07 No Class: Labor Day
W Sep. 09 The Genetic Core of Development II (pp. 77-99)
F Sep. 11 The Genetic Core of Development III (pp. 77-99)
M Sep. 14 Exercises 1 on the Genetic Core of Development
W Sep. 16 The Paradigm of Differential Gene Expression I (pp.101-138) – Exercises 1 due at 5:00 pm.
F Sep. 18 The Paradigm of Differential Gene Expression II (pp.101-138)
M Sep. 21 Exercises 2 on Differential Gene Expression and Class Review 2
W Sep. 23 Exam I
F Sep. 25 Cell-Cell Communication in Development I (pp. 139-172)
M Sep. 28 Cell-Cell Communication in Development II (pp. 139-172)
W Sep. 30 Cell-Cell Communication in Development III (pp. 139-172)
F Oct. 02 No Class: Fall Faculty Conference
M Oct. 05 Exercises 3 on the Cell-Cell Communication in Development
II- Early Embryonic Development – Exercises 3 due at 5:00 pm.
W Oct. 07 Quiz 2 (Cell-Cell Com.) and Fertilization: Beginning a New Organism I (pp. 175-209)
F Oct. 09 Fertilization: Beginning a New Organism II (pp. 175-209)
M Oct. 12 No Class: Fall Break
W Oct.14 Early Development in Invertebrates: Sea Urchin and C. elegans I (pp. 211-251)
F Oct. 16 Early Development in Invertebrates: Sea Urchin and C. elegans II (pp. 211-251)
M Oct. 19 The Genetics of Axis Specification in Drosophila I (pp. 253-290)
W Oct. 21 The Genetics of Axis Specification in Drosophila II (pp. 253-290)
F Oct. 23 The Genetics of Axis Specification in Drosophila III (pp. 253-290) and Class Review 3
M Oct. 26 Exam II (comprehensive)
W Oct. 28 Early Development and Axis Formation in Amphibians I (pp. 291-324)
F Oct. 30 Early Development and Axis Formation in Amphibians II (pp. 291-324)
M Nov. 02 Early Development of Vertebrates: Mammals I (pp. 348-369)
W Nov. 04 Early Development of Vertebrates: Mammals II (pp. 348-369)
F Nov. 06 Class Review 4: Summary of Early Embryonic Development
III- Later Embryonic Development
M Nov. 09 The Emergence of the Ectoderm: Central Nervous System and Epidermis I (pp. 373-405)
W Nov. 11 The Emergence of the Ectoderm: Central Nervous System and Epidermis II (pp. 373-405)
F Nov. 13 Neural Crest Cells and Axonal Specificity I (pp. 407- 441)
M Nov. 16 Quiz 3 (Ectoderm) and Neural Crest Cells and Axonal Specificity II (pp. 407- 441)
W Nov. 18 Paraxial and Intermediate Mesoderm I (pp. 443-470)
F Nov. 20 Paraxial and Intermediate Mesoderm II (pp. 443-470) and Class Review 5
M Nov. 23 Exam III (comprehensive)
W Nov. 25 No Class: Thanksgiving Break
F Nov. 27 No Class: Thanksgiving Break
M Nov. 30 Lateral Plate Mesoderm and Endoderm (pp. 471-504)
W Dec. 2 Sex Determination (pp. 529-554)
F Dec. 4 Assessment Quiz 4 and Review for Final Exam
F Dec. 11 10:10 am to 12:10 pm Final Exam
41
APPENDIX Id
Developmental Biology Laboratory BL 413
Fall 2008
Dr. Marie-dominique Franco
Department of Biology Room #223; Tel: 303-458-4198;
mfranco@regis.edu
Office hours:
Mondays and Wednesdays from 8:00 to 9:00 am, Fridays from 8:00 to 10:00 am
and by appointments. Note: All e-mail communications will be sent to your
Regis account.
Course website: http://academic.regis.edu/mfranco/devbio/devbio.htm
Withdrawal deadline: November 7, 2008.
MEETING TIME
Laboratory sessions meet once a week on Thursdays from 9:25 am to 12:05 pm in room #SC209.
COURSE DESCRIPTION
This course will examine the organismal, cellular, and molecular aspects of development in a variety
of animal model organisms (invertebrates and vertebrates) and will incorporate both classical and
modern experimental techniques. The principles for the current knowledge of the developmental
processes will be presented during the lectures and the laboratories will allow for the investigation of
those processes using different model organisms. The laboratory contents will not always correlate
with the lectures’ materials, therefore it is essential that you read your manual before each laboratory
session. Although each experiment is designed to be completed in 2 hours and 40 minutes, you will
have to sometimes observe and record developing organisms over the course of a week, following
initial experimentations.
COURSE OBJECTIVES
To provide an understanding of the different steps leading to the formation of fully functional
organisms by mainly focusing on the molecular and cellular mechanisms, to gain an appreciation for
the scientific method, to develop skills in critical analysis of observations, data and scientific
information, and to develop skills on how to communicate scientific data.
READING
Weekly assigned readings will include appropriate sections from the following and I may provide
research papers for specific topics:
• Gilbert, S.F. 2006. Developmental Biology. 8 th ed. Sunderland: Sinauer Associates Inc.
• Franco, M-d. 2009. From Molecules to Organisms: An Investigative Approach to the
Developmental Biology Laboratory. Reno: Bent Tree Press.
• Wright, S.J. 2005. A Photographic Atlas of Developmental Biology. Englewood: Morton
Publishing Company.
• McMillan, V.E. 2006. Writing Papers in the Biological Sciences. 4 th ed. Boston: Bedford/St.
Martin’s.
42
SUPPLIES
You will need to buy a research notebook and a 2 1/2 inch binder. In this binder, you will put your
laboratory manual, research notebook, research papers, and anything else you will find pertinent to the
course. In addition, you will also need a calculator.
HOW TO STUDY FOR THIS COURSE
This course is an in-depth upper division course that requires a lot of work during and outside the
laboratory sessions. In order to succeed in this course you need to 1) read the laboratory manual prior
to the laboratory sessions, 2) conduct your experiments knowing why and how you are doing them, 3)
turn in well-thought and well-written papers, 4) develop an interesting independent project with a
testable hypothesis, and 5) spend extra time observing and recording developing organisms.
REGIS COLLEGE WRITING CENTER
The Writing Center is a free resource for Regis College undergraduates. All writers, no matter how
proficient, benefit from working with a writing consultant. These peer consultants will help you at any
point in your writing process, from brainstorming for ideas to organizing a draft to polishing the final
version. You get immediate and personal feedback about your writing as well as answers to your
questions. Appointments are recommended. You can stop by the Writing Center in Loyola room #1
or call at 303-458-4039 for more information.
ATTENDANCE AND PROMPTNESS
Attendance is required; any missed laboratory will result in minus 50 points each from the grand total
points. If you are a member of the NCAA athletic team and must miss a laboratory session for an
athletic competition, you must present your instructor with an official schedule provided by your coach
during the first week of the semester and the penalty points will be waived. In addition, it is your
responsibility to let your instructor know that you will be missing a laboratory a week in advance;
otherwise you will be penalized as mentioned above. If you must miss a laboratory session for medical
or family emergency, you must notify your instructor and provide an official letter of explanation, as
any missed laboratory without an official letter of explanation will result in minus 50 points. There are
no make-up experiments for excused missed laboratories, you will be responsible for studying any
missed material on your own.
Promptness is mandatory; the door of the laboratory will be closed at 9:25 am. Any late coming will
result in minus 10 points each from the grand total points. Indeed, tardiness is not acceptable, as your
instructor needs to start pre-laboratory in time in order to ensure in time ending of the laboratory
period.
MISSED AND LATE ASSIGNMENTS Any missed assignments will result in a “0” for the missed
assignment unless you provide your instructor with an official letter of explanation. If you provide
your instructor with an official letter of explanation, your grade will be averaged out (except for the sea
urchin introduction/References and chick development papers). No late assignments will be accepted
and will therefore be considered as missed assignments unless you provide your instructor with an
official letter of explanation; in this case, you will have additional time (to be defined by the instructor)
to complete the assignment. On a case to case basis your instruction may allow late assignment with a
drop of a letter grade per day after the due date. In addition, the final paper on chick development will
not be graded if the draft and the grading template sheet are not attached.
DISABILITY
If you have a documented disability requiring academic adjustments for this course, please contact the
Disability Services Office (303-458-4941, disability@regis.edu). The Disability Services office will
43
eview your documentation with you and determine appropriate, reasonable accommodations.
Following the meeting with Disability Services personnel, please make an appointment with your
instructor to discuss your accommodation request in light of the course requirement.
INNAPROPRIATE ACADEMIC CONDUCT
Academic dishonesty such as plagiarism and cheating will be severely punished as it will result in
the failure of the course (grade F) and the offense will be reported to the Biology Department Chair
and to the Dean’s Office for documentation that could lead to expulsion from Regis College (refer to
the Regis University Bulletin for more information).
Cell phones and pagers use (including text messaging) will result in minus 10 points each time from
the grand total points. Cell phones and pagers should be turned off. If you need to be contacted for an
emergency situation, you should notify your instructor at the beginning of the laboratory period.
INNAPROPRIATE LABORATORY CITIZENSHIP
Each pair of students will be responsible for cleaning their instruments, their glassware and their bench
at the end of each laboratory session. Your Teaching Assistant will inspect your bench after each
laboratory session and penalty points will be taken out of the grand total points if you leave your work
area dirty (minus 20 per infraction). Also, it is expected that students will show respect for the
equipment, furniture, and materials in the laboratory. Vandalism will result in the failure of the course
(grade F) and the student will be held financially responsible for the cost of professional repairs.
Working with live animals is a privilege that requires compliance with institutional policies and
responsibilities. Therefore, each student should treat live animals with respect and give them the best
care.
RESPONSIBLE MICROSCOPE USE
Use only the microscopes assigned to you. Microscopes must be cared for appropriately. If a
microscope is returned to the cabinet with either a slide left on the stage or a high or intermediate
powered lens clicked into the functional position, or an inappropriately wrapped cord, then BOTH
students assigned to the microscope will receive a minus 10 points penalty from the grand total points.
GRADING
Research Notebook
Maintaining or keeping a research notebook while conducting scientific experiments (whether be
defined by the instructor or be inquisitive such as in independent projects or research), is essential in
conducting good science. Therefore you will be asked to keep a detailed research notebook for the
duration of this course. The pre-lab entries and following notebook keeping entries will be graded by
your instructor at the beginning of each laboratory session. See the INSTRUCTIONS TO
ASSIGNMENTS section for points’ distribution and discuss assignment importance.
Introduction and References Sections (Sea urchin fertilization)
This assignment has been incorporated in this course, mainly to emphasize the importance of
documenting a paper with appropriate sources and using an appropriate format. See the
INSTRUCTIONS TO ASSIGNMENTS section for points’ distribution and discuss assignment
importance.
Research Paper (Chick development)
This assignment is designed to teach students scientific writing as a critical aspect of the scientific
process in the reporting of new results (or known results as in a teaching setting) in scientific journals
to the larger community of scientists. Communication of your results contributes to the pool of
44
knowledge within your discipline and very often provides information that helps others interpret their
own experimental results. Most journals accept papers for publication only after peer review by a small
group of scientists who work in the same field and who recommend the paper be published (usually
with some revision). See the INSTRUCTIONS TO ASSIGNMENTS section for points’ distribution
and discuss assignment importance.
Independent Research Proposal
This assignment is designed to teach students scientific study design and implementation. The
completion and final presentation of your independent project require a lot of planning and work.
Students that are not prepared adequately will panic, experience frustration and ultimately fail to
succeed. Thus, you need to seriously think about developing hypotheses and experiments well before
your proposal is due. See the INSTRUCTIONS TO ASSIGNMENTS section for points’ distribution
and discuss assignment importance.
Poster
This assignment is designed to teach students scientific data sharing in a more informal manner than
that of a research paper. A scientific poster is a large document that can communicate your research at
a scientific meeting, and is composed of a title, an introduction, an overview of your experimental
approach, your results, some insightful discussion of results, a listing of previously published articles
that are important to your research, and some brief acknowledgement of the assistance and financial
support from others. If all text is kept to a minimum, a person could fully read your poster in less than
10 minutes and you should also be able to present in about 10 minutes. See the INSTRUCTIONS TO
ASSIGNMENTS section for points’ distribution and discuss assignment importance.
Poster Peer-Review
This assignment is designed to teach students how to evaluate their peers’ works and how to improve
their works though valuable feedback on what is compelling and what is problematic. See the
INSTRUCTIONS TO ASSIGNMENTS section for points’ distribution and discuss assignment
importance.
Points Distribution and Grading Scale
Your final grade will be assigned based on the percentage of points earned out of a total of 600 points
as described below. In addition, I may give occasional pop quizzes (5 points each) that will be added
as bonus points.
Pre-lab entries
130 points (13 x 10 points)
Research notebook keeping
110 points (11 x 10 points)
Introduction and References sections (Sea urchin fertilization) 20 points
Draft paper (Chick development)
50 points
Final paper (Chick development)
100 points
Independent project proposal
40 points
Poster
100 points
Poster peer-review
20 points (2 x 10 points)
Assessment quiz
30 points
Grand Total
600 points
A 100-92.5 % A - 92.4-89.5 % B+ 89.4-85.5 % B- 85.4-82.5 %
B - 82.4-79.5 % C+ 79.4-75.5 % C 75.4-72.5 % C - 72.4-69.5 %
D+ 69.4-65.5 % D 65.4-62.5 % D - 62.4-59.5 % F
DATE TOPIC ASSIGNMENT DUE
Lab 1 Th. Sep. 4 th Introduction, assessment quiz (20’) and library instruction including Writing Center
presentation (10:30 am in DML room #310)
Sea Urchin Development Module
Lab 2 (Ex.1)
Th. Sep. 11 th
Lab 3 (Ex.2)
Th. Sep. 18 th
In vitro fertilization and early development
in normal and altered seawater conditions.
Early development continued.
Xenopus laevis Development Module
Lab 4 (Ex.3) In vitro fertilization, embryonic and early
Th. Sep. 25 th larval development.
Lab 5 (Ex.4) Early larval development and
Th. Oct. 2 nd metamorphosis.
Chick Development Module
Lab 6 (Ex. 5)
Th. Oct. 9 th
Preparation of tissue lysates from whole
embryos, brains and hearts.
Lab 7 (Ex. 6) Gel electrophoresis and transfer of proteins
Th. Oct. 16 th isolated from embryos, brains and hearts.
Lab 8 (Ex. 7) Detection and analysis of the expression
Th. Oct. 23 rd pattern of the proteins Pax-6 and β-catenin.
Drosophila melanogaster Development Module
Lab 9 (Ex. 8)
Th. Oct. 30 th
Lab 10
Th. Nov. 6 th
Lab 11 (Ex. 9)
Th. Nov. 13 th
Lab 12 (Ex. 10)
Th. Nov. 20 th
Purification of total RNA from embryonic,
larval, pupal, and adult stages.
Meeting for independent project in my
office
Reverse transcription of mRNA and
polymerase chain reaction (PCR).
Analysis of PCR products.
Independent Project Module
Th. Nov. 27th th No class: Thanksgiving Break
Lab 13
Th. Dec. 4 th
Lab 14
Th. Dec. 11 th
Tu. Dec. 16 th
10:00 am to noon
Independent project.
Poster preparation instructions and
independent project continued.
FINAL: Poster Presentation of
Independent Project.
-Pre-lab entry for Ex.1
-Introduction and References sections of
research paper with 3 references (Topic:
role of Ca ++ in sea urchin fertilization)
-Pre-lab entry for Ex.2
-Notebook keeping for Ex.1 with Tables I,
II, and III
-Pre-lab entry for Ex. 3
-Notebook keeping of Ex.2 with Table II
-Pre-lab entry for Ex. 4
-Notebook keeping for Ex.3 with Table II
-Pre-lab entry for Ex.5
-Notebook keeping for Ex.4 with Table I
-Pre-lab entry for Ex. 6
-Notebook keeping for Ex. 5
-Pre-lab entry for Ex. 7
-Notebook keeping for Ex. 6
-Pre-lab entry for Ex. 8
-Notebook keeping for Ex. 7
-Draft of paper on chick development
-Independent project proposal with a
detailed list of materials (2 copies)
-Pre-lab entry for Ex. 9
-Notebook keeping for Ex. 8 with Table II
-Pre-lab entry for Ex. 10
-Notebook keeping for Ex. 9 with table II
-Final paper on chick development, paper
clip draft and grading template for grade
-Pre-lab entry for independent project
-Notebook keeping for Ex. 10 with Figure 3
and Table I
-Pre-lab entry for independent project
-Notebook keeping for independent project
-Assessment quiz (20’)
-Pre-lab entry and notebook keeping for
independent project
-Poster peer-review
46
INSTRUCTIONS TO ASSIGNMENTS
Research Notebook Include name and table of contents (minus 10 points each if missing)
Pre-lab entries (10 points each)
Prior to each laboratory session, you should read the pertinent sections of the laboratory manual and of the
lecture textbook and you should make a short pre-lab entry in your notebook consisting of the following:
Date: (written and underlined) followed by the date of the experiments.
Title: (written and underlined) followed by the title of the experiments.
Purpose: (written and underlined) followed by at least 2 sentences explaining the purposes/goals of the
experiments.
Hypothesis/es: (written and underlined) followed by your hypothesis/es about the outcomes of the experiments.
Support for hypothesis/es: (written and underlined) followed by background information supporting your
hypothesis/es, available in either the laboratory manual, or your lecture notes or in primary research literature.
Materials and Methods: (written and underlined) followed by a very short description of the procedure/s
(combination of materials and methods, no bullet format for materials or methods) you will be using.
Date
(1 point)
Title
(1 point)
Purpose
(2 points)
Hypothesis/es
(2 points)
Support for
hypothesis/es (2 points)
Materials and Methods
(2 points)
Poor/Needs Improvement
(0-75%)
-Absent or wrong date
(0-0.75 point)
-Absent or wrong title
(0-0.75 point)
-Purpose absent or irrelevant
(0-1.50 points)
-Hypothesis/es absent or
irrelevant
(0-1.50 points)
-Reason/s hypothesis/es is/are
proposed absent or irrelevant
(0-1.50 points)
-M/M absent, or Materials
separated from methods, or
bullet format
(0-1.50 points)
Approaches expectations
(75-90%)
-N/A
-N/A
-Purpose not clearly stated
(1.50-1.80 points)
-Hypotheses/es mostly unclear
(1.50-1.80 points)
-Reason/s hypothesis/es is/are
proposed mostly clear
(1.50-1.80 points)
-M/M mostly concise and
relevant
(1.50-1.80 points)
Meets Expectations
(90-100%)
-Correct date
(0.9-1.00 point)
-Correct title
(0.9-1.00 point)
-Purpose concise and clearly stated
(1.80-2.00 points)
-Hypothesis/es clearly stated
(1.80-2.00 points)
-Reason/s hypothesis/es is/are
proposed concise and clear
(1.8-2.00 points)
-M/M concise and relevant
(1.8-2.00 points)
Research notebook keeping (10 points each)
This will consist in recording a detailed diary of all the experiments you are performing. For each laboratory,
and after the corresponding pre-lab entry, you should finish recording your experiments as follows:
Results: (written and underlined) followed by your raw data presented both in prose and illustrated with
tables/graphs/drawings with legends. All figures, tables and drawings should 1) be numbered and referenced in
the prose, 2) have a title, and 3) have a legend and units. Note: Transfer all data tables from your lab manual to
your research notebook.
Reject or support hypotheses: (written and underlined) followed by whether and why your hypothesis/es
was/were supported or rejected.
Conclusion/Discussion: (written and underlined) followed by a short summary of your experiments,
sources of errors, and how to trouble-shoot and future studies.
Poor/Needs Improvement Approaches expectations Meets Expectations
Results
(6 points)
Reject/support
hypothesis/es
(2 points)
Conclusion/Discussion
(2 points)
(0-75%)
-No prose, no row data or
inappropriate figures, tables
and/or drawings
(0-4.50 points)
-Hypothesis/es not discussed
(0-1.50 points)
-No conclusion or missing parts
(0-1.50 points)
(75-90%)
-Mostly clear prose and most
data present in correct format
(4.50-5.40 points)
-Hypothesis/es mostly clearly
discussed
(1.50-1.80 points)
-Conclusion mostly present and
clear
(1.50-1.80 points)
(90-100%)
-Prose and correct row data present
(5.40-6.00 points)
-Hypothesis/es clearly discussed
(1.80-2.00 points)
-Clear and appropriate conclusion
(1.80-2.00 points)
47
Introduction and References Sections on “The role of Ca ++ in sea urchin fertilization”
(20 points)
This assignment has been designed to mainly emphasize the importance of documenting a research paper with
appropriate sources and using an appropriate and professional format. Following the Library Instruction
session, you will have to write a short Introduction section and the corresponding References section as found in
a scientific research paper. You are not required to write the other sections (Abstract, Materials and Methods,
Results and Discussion) found in a scientific research paper. The Introduction section should consist of a few
paragraphs with in-text references and the References section should list the references used in the introduction.
Poor/Needs Improvement Approaches expectations Meets Expectations
Introduction:
Prose
(5 points)
Introduction:
In-text references
(7.5 points)
References
(7.5 points)
(0-75%)
-Background irrelevant to topic
-Background poorly written
(0-3.75 points)
-Fewer than 3 references
-Background info. inappropriately
cited (place and format)
(0-5.625 points)
-References missing
-Incorrect format
(0-5.625 points)
(75-90%)
-Background mostly relevant to topic
-Background mostly well written
(3.75-4.50 points)
-Some incorrect in-text citations (place
and format)
(5.625-6.75points)
-Some errors in citations
(5.625-6.75points)
(90-100%)
-Background relevant to topic
-Background well written
(4.50-5.00 points)
-At least 3 references
-Correctly cited references (place
and format)
(6.75-7.50 points)
-All 3 references present
-Correct format
(6.75-7.50 points)
Research Paper on “The expression patterns of the proteins Pax-6 and β-catenin in
whole embryos, brains and hearts of the developing chick Gallus gallus”
After completing the chick development module, you will have to report your results by writing a complete
scientific research paper using the following instructions and grading templates.
Draft paper (50 points)
Refer to McMillan, V.E. 2006. Writing Papers in the Biological Sciences. 4th ed. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s,
for detailed instructions.
Body length
(2 points)
Front page
(2 points)
and penalties
points
Abstract
(3 points)
Introduction:
Prose
(5 points)
Materials and
Methods
(5 points)
Poor/Needs Improvement
(0-75%)
-Below 5 pages (excluding front page,
figures and References section)
(0-1.50 points)
-No front page (-5%)
-Title or names missing
-Title does not include results
-Citation format not stated
(0-1.50 points)
-Abstract excludes relevance, methods,
hypothesis and results
-Abstract is not coherent
(0-2.25 points)
-Background mostly irrelevant to
hypothesis and does not clearly lead to
hypothesis
-Hypothesis unclear
-The reason the hypothesis was
proposed is not stated or unclear
-Poor logic and paragraphing
(0-3.75 points)
-Not written using passive voice
-Not written using past tense
-Unclear, lengthy description of study
-Includes unnecessary details
-Lists materials
-Does not explain experimental design
(0-3.75 points)
Approaches expectations
(75-90%)
-Between 4 and 5 pages
(1.50-1.80 points)
-Title poorly worded
-Title includes minor error
-Citation format not clearly
stated
(1.50-1.80 points)
-Abstract is somewhat wordy
and long in summarizing all of
paper
-Abstract is somewhat unclear
(2.25-2.70 points)
-Background mostly relevant to
hypothesis and mostly
clearly leads to hypothesis
-Hypothesis mostly clear
-The reason the hypothesis was
proposed is somewhat unclear
-Acceptable logic and
paragraphing
(3.75-4.50 points)
-Mostly written using passive
voice and past tense
-Mostly clear description
-Includes some needless details
-Explains most important
experimental design aspects
(3.75-4.50 points)
Meets Expectations
(90-100%)
-5 pages (excluding front page,
figures and References section)
(1.80-2.00 points)
-Title states conclusion
-Authors appropriately cited
-Citation format clearly stated
(CSE or APA)
(1.80-2.00 points)
-Abstract is concise and
summarizes all of paper
-Abstract is coherent and clear
(2.70-3.00 points)
-All background relevant to
hypothesis and clearly leads to
hypothesis
-Hypothesis clear
-The reason the hypothesis was
proposed is clear
-Excellent logic and
paragraphing
(4.50-5.00 points)
-Used passive voice
-Used past tense
-Clear description of study
-Concise description of study
-Avoids unnecessary details
-Clearly explains design
(4.50-5.00 points)
48
Results
(10 points)
Discussion
(7 points)
In-text citation
(5 points)
and penalty points
Acknowledgements
(2 points)
References
(5 points)
and penalty points
Experimental
Design and
Cohesiveness
(4 points)
-Not written using active voice and
present tense
-Prose summary of study absent
-Prose summary of study incoherent
-Prose summary includes discussion of
hypothesis
-Prose summary does not cite table(s)
and figure(s)
-Raw data not included
-Inappropriate figure(s) included
-No figure(s) included
(0-7.50 points)
-Incorrectly states that hypothesis was
supported or rejected
-Why hypothesis was supported or
rejected not explained
-Discussion of larger context absent
-Incoherent attempt to place results in
larger context
-Alternative interpretations absent
-Discussion of sources of error absent
(0-5.25 points)
-Fewer than 5 references (-10% each)
-Incorrect citation format (-5% each)
-Non-academic sources (-10% each)
-Background inappropriately located
(0-3.75 points)
-Acknowledgements frivolous or
absent
(0-1.50 points)
-Fewer that 5 references (-10% each)
-Literature uses non-CSE or non-APA
format (-5% each)
-Literature cited section absent
-Literature citations ordered
inappropriately (not alphabetically by
author) (-5% each)
(0-3.75 points)
-Demonstrates little understanding of
study
-Paper incoherent, not logically
consistent, and/or poorly written
(0-3.00 points)
-Mostly written using active
voice and present tense
-Mostly clear prose summary of
study
-Presents some (not all) raw data
-Includes figure(s) that illustrate
relevant trends/results but are in
some small way inappropriate
(7.50-9.00 points)
-Does not explain why
hypothesis was supported or
rejected very clearly
-Results ineffectively placed in
larger context
-Results poorly linked to Intro.
-Alternative interpretations
discussed, but unlikely
-Some significant sources of
error not discussed
(5.25-6.30 points)
-Minor incorrect citations (place
and format)
(3.75-4.50 points)
-Acknowledgements somewhat
well written
(1.50-1.80 points)
-Some literature citations in CSE
or APA format, others in
inappropriate format
(3.75-4.50 points)
-Demonstrates some
understanding of the study
-Paper mostly coherent, and
logically consistent
-Paper mostly well written
(3.00-3.60 points)
-Written using active voice and
present tense
-Clear prose summary of data
-Prose summary cites table(s)
and figure(s)
-Clearly presents raw data
-Includes figure(s) that clearly
illustrate relevant trends/results
-Includes figure(s) that have
appropriately labeled axes and
titles
(9.00-10.00 points)
-Correctly states that hypothesis
was supported or rejected
-Clearly explains why
hypothesis was supported or
rejected
-Results placed in larger context
-Results placed in context of
background outlined in Intro.
-Reasonable alternative
interpretations discussed
-Sources of error discussed
(6.30-7.00 points)
-At least 5 references
-All citations are academic
-Correctly cited references
(place and format: CSE or APA)
(4.50-5.00 points)
-Acknowledgements well
written
(1.80-2.00 points)
-Literature cited present
-Literature uses CSE or APA
format
-Literature citations ordered
appropriately (alphabetically by
author)
(4.50-5.00 points)
-Clearly demonstrates an
understanding of the study
(including background)
-Paper coherent and logically
consistent
-Paper well written
(3.60-4.00 points)
Subtotal: ----------------------
Additional Penalties
-Paper not stapled (minus 5 points) ----------------------------------
-Incorrect spelling, grammar, or word choice (minus 2 points each) ----------------------------------
-Direct quotes (minus 5 points each) ----------------------------------
-Formatting error of section headings or sectioning (minus 5 points each) ----------------------------------
-Usage of non primary literature (minus 5 points each) ----------------------------------
-Citation format (CSE or APA) does not appear in the front page ----------------------------------
will result in the loss of all references points (in-text and References)
Final total: --------------------
49
Final paper (100 points)
Refer to McMillan, V.E. 2006. Writing Papers in the Biological Sciences. 4th ed. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s,
for detailed instructions.
Body length
(4 points)
Front page
(3 points)
and penalties
points
Abstract
(5 points)
Introduction:
Prose
(10 points)
Materials and
Methods
(8 points)
Results
(20 points)
Discussion
(12 points)
In-text citation
(10 points)
and penalty points
Poor/Needs Improvement
(0-75%)
-Below 6 pages (excluding front page,
figures and References section)
(0-3.00 points)
-No front page (-5%)
-Title or names missing
-Title does not include results
-Citation format not stated
(0-2.25 points)
-Abstract excludes relevance, methods,
hypothesis and results
-Abstract is not coherent
(0-3.75 points)
-Background mostly irrelevant to
hypothesis and does not clearly lead to
hypothesis
-Hypothesis unclear
-The reason the hypothesis was
proposed is not stated or unclear
-Poor logic and paragraphing
(0-7.50 points)
-Not written using passive voice
-Not written using past tense
-Unclear, lengthy description of study
-Includes unnecessary details
-Lists materials
-Does not explain experimental design
(0-6.00 points)
-Not written using active voice and
present tense
-Prose summary of study absent
-Prose summary of study incoherent
-Prose summary includes discussion of
hypothesis
-Prose summary does not cite table(s)
and figure(s)
-Raw data not included
-Inappropriate or no figure(s) included
(0-15.00 points)
-Incorrectly states that hypothesis was
supported or rejected
-Why hypothesis was supported or
rejected not explained
-Discussion of larger context absent
-Incoherent attempt to place results in
larger context
-Alternative interpretations absent
-Discussion of sources of error absent
(0-9.00 points)
-Fewer than 7 references (-10% each)
-Incorrect citation format (-5% each)
-Non-academic sources (-10% each)
-Background inappropriately located
(0-7.50 points)
Approaches expectations
(75-90%)
-Between 6 and 7 pages
(excluding front page, figures
and References section)
(3.00-3.60 points)
-Title poorly worded
-Title includes minor error
-Citation format not clearly
stated
(2.25-2.70 points)
-Abstract is somewhat wordy
and long in summarizing all of
paper
-Abstract is somewhat unclear
(3.75-4.50 points)
-Background mostly relevant to
hypothesis and mostly
clearly leads to hypothesis
-Hypothesis mostly clear
-The reason the hypothesis was
proposed is somewhat unclear
-Acceptable logic and
paragraphing
(7.50-9.00 points)
-Mostly written using passive
voice and past tense
-Mostly clear description
-Includes some needless details
-Explains most important
experimental design aspects
(6.00-7.20 points)
-Mostly written using active
voice and present tense
-Mostly clear prose summary of
study
-Presents some (not all) raw data
-Includes figure(s) that illustrate
relevant trends/results but are in
some small way inappropriate
(15.00-18.00 points)
-Does not explain why
hypothesis was supported or
rejected very clearly
-Results ineffectively placed in
larger context
-Results poorly linked to Intro.
-Alternative interpretations
discussed, but unlikely
-Some significant sources of
error not discussed
(9.00-10.80 points)
-Minor incorrect citations (place
and format)
(7.50-9.00 points)
Meets Expectations
(90-100%)
-7 pages (excluding front page,
figures and References section)
(3.60-4.00 points)
-Title states conclusion
-Authors appropriately cited
-Citation format clearly stated
(CSE or APA)
(2.70-3.00 points)
-Abstract is concise and
summarizes all of paper
-Abstract is coherent and clear
(4.50-5.00 points)
-All background relevant to
hypothesis and clearly leads to
hypothesis
-Hypothesis clear
-The reason the hypothesis was
proposed is clear
-Excellent logic and
paragraphing
(9.00-10.00 points)
-Used passive voice
-Used past tense
-Clear description of study
-Concise description of study
-Avoids unnecessary details
-Clearly explains design
(7.20-8.00 points)
-Written using active voice and
present tense
-Clear prose summary of data
-Prose summary cites table(s)
and figure(s)
-Clearly presents raw data
-Includes figure(s) that clearly
illustrate relevant trends/results
-Includes figure(s) that have
appropriately axes and titles
(18.00-20.00 points)
-Correctly states that hypothesis
was supported or rejected
-Clearly explains why
hypothesis was supported or
rejected
-Results placed in larger context
-Results placed in context of
background outlined in Intro.
-Reasonable alternative
interpretations discussed
-Sources of error discussed
(10.80-12.00 points)
-At least 7 references
-All sources are academic
-Correctly cited references
(place and format: CSE or APA)
(9.00-10.00 points)
50
Acknowledgements
(3 points)
References
(10 points)
and penalty points
Experimental
Design and
Cohesiveness
(6 points)
Revision
(9 points)
-Acknowledgements frivolous or
absent
(0-2.25 points)
-Fewer that 5 references (-10% each)
-Literature uses non-CSE or non-APA
format (-5% each)
-Literature cited section absent
-Literature citations ordered
inappropriately (not alphabetically by
author) (-5% each)
(0-7.50 points)
-Demonstrates little understanding of
study
-Paper incoherent, not logically
consistent, and/or poorly written
(0-4.50 points)
-Final not substantively different
(inappropriately) from draft
-Few/no substantive comments
addressed
(0-6.75 points)
-Acknowledgements somewhat
well written
(2.25-2.70 points)
-Some literature citations in CSE
or APA format, others in
inappropriate format
(7.50-9.00 points)
-Demonstrates some
understanding of the study
-Paper mostly coherent, and
logically consistent
-Paper mostly well written
(4.50-5.40 points)
-Final substantively different (as
appropriate) from draft
-Most substantive comments
addressed
(6.75-8.10 points)
-Acknowledgements well
written
(2.70-3.00 points)
-Literature cited present
-Literature uses CSE or APA
format
-Literature citations ordered
appropriately (alphabetically by
author)
(9.00-10.00 points)
-Clearly demonstrates an
understanding of the study
(including background)
-Paper coherent and logically
consistent
-Paper well written
(5.40-6.00 points)
-Final substantively different (as
appropriate) from draft
-All substantive comments
addressed
(8.10-9.00 points)
Subtotal: ----------------------
Additional Penalties
-Draft paper not paper-clipped to final Paper will not be graded (0)
-Grading template of draft paper not paper-clipped to final Paper will not be graded (0)
-Paper not stapled (minus 5 points) ----------------------------------
-Incorrect spelling, grammar, or word choice (minus 2 points each) ----------------------------------
-Direct quotes (minus 5 points each) ----------------------------------
-Formatting error of section headings or sectioning (minus 5 points each) ----------------------------------
-Usage of non primary literature (minus 5 points each) ----------------------------------
-Citation format (CSE or APA) does not appear in the front page ----------------------------------
will result in the loss of all references points (in-text and References)
Final total: --------------------
Independent Research Proposal (40 points)
A substantial portion of your grade will be based on an independent research project that you will perform with
a laboratory mate. Think of this project as experiments you are inventing. The purpose of this independent
project is to give you a chance to be involved in all stages of a small scientific investigation, from the
identification of an interesting developmental biology question, formulation of hypothesis/es that might account
for the observed patterns, appropriate experimental designs, collection, analysis, and interpretation and
presentation of the data.
The purpose of this project is to make you a better consumer and practitioner of science by: 1) having you
conduct your own research (from identifying an interesting question, organizing appropriate experimental or
observational design, collecting and analyzing the data); and 2) getting you to transmit your results to a
scientific audience.
Your proposal (2 copies per group) should be written as follows:
Date: (written and underlined) followed by the date you wrote your proposal.
Names: (written and underlined) followed by the names of the investigators.
Title: (written and underlined) followed by the title of the project (without conclusion in it as you will not have
performed the experiments yet).
51
Introduction: (written and underlined) followed by a small paragraph explaining the purposes/goals of the
experiments and including one peer-reviewed reference using either CSE or APA format.
Hypotheses, one per experiment: (written and underlined) followed by your hypothesis/es concerning the
outcomes/results of the experiments.
Experiments outline: (written and underlined) followed by a detailed description of your procedure. Break the
procedure into different sub-headings and include controls (positive and negative) for each of them. This
section is not the same as writing a Materials and Methods section of a research paper. Here you can use the
present imperative tense and bullets.
Materials: (written and underlined) followed by a table of all needed materials. You may have to repeat some
experiments for accuracy, therefore ask for more supplies to account for repetitions and also pipetting errors.
You should provide items under $10.00 if they can easily be found at local stores. Use the following table
format. Usually you will have to make your own solutions, therefore ask for items such as bottles, stirring bars,
balance, pH papers and others.
References: (written and underlined) followed by the citations of the reference/s you used in the Introduction
using either CSE or APA format.
Table format:
Item
Concentration Volume Quantity T o C
Small specimen dish N/A N/A 2 RT
1L bottle N/A N/A 2 RT
Sucrose 1M 100ml N/A 4 o C
Running buffer 1X 500ml N/A RT
Date and Names
(1 point)
Title
(2 points)
Introduction
(10 points)
and penalty points
Hypothesis/es
(4 points)
Experimental Outline
(7 points)
Materials
(13 points)
References
(3 points)
and penalty points
Poor/Needs Improvement
(0-75%)
-Absent or wrong
(0-0.75 point)
-Absent or wrong title
(0-1.50 points)
-Background mostly irrelevant
to hypothesis and does not
clearly lead to hypothesis
-Poor logic and paragraphing
-Citation missing (-10%)
(0-7.50 points)
-Hypothesis/es absent or
irrelevant
(0-3.00 points)
-Experimental design does not
directly address hypothesis/es
(0-5.25 points)
-Materials does not follow
required format (see above
table)
-Materials does not match
proposed experiments
(0-1.50 points)
-No reference (-10%)
-Literature uses non-CSE or
non-APA format (-5%)
(0-2.25 points)
Approaches expectations
(75-90%)
-N/A
-Title poorly worded
(1.50-1.80 points)
-Background mostly relevant to
hypothesis and mostly
clearly leads to hypothesis
-Acceptable logic and
paragraphing
-Errors in citation format
(7.50-9.00 points)
-Hypotheses/es mostly not
clear
(3.00-3.60 points)
-Experimental design directly
addresses hypothesis/es
(5.25-6.30 points)
-Materials somewhat follows
required format (see above
table)
-Materials somewhat matches
proposed experiments
(1.50-1.80 points)
-Minor errors in citations
format
(2.25-2.70 points)
Meets Expectations
(90-100%)
-Correct date and names
(0.9-1.00 point)
-Correct title
(1.80-2.00 points)
-All background relevant to
hypothesis and clearly leads to
hypothesis
-Excellent logic and paragraphing
-Citation using either CSE or APA
format
(9.00-10.00 points)
-Hypothesis/es clearly stated
(3.60-4.00 points)
- Experimental design effectively
addresses hypothesis/es
(6.30-7.00 points)
-Materials follows required format
(see above table)
-Materials matches proposed
experiments
(1.8-2.00 points)
-Literature cited present
-Literature uses CSE or APA format
(2.70-3.00 points)
Subtotal: ----------------------
-Missing one copy (needs 2 copies of proposal) Prop. will not be graded (0)
-Direct quotes (minus 5 points each) ----------------------------------
-Usage of non primary literature (minus 5 points) ----------------------------------
Final total: --------------------
52
Poster
Preparation and Presentation (100 points)
A scientific poster is a method of professional communication that visually tells the comprehensive, but condensed,
story of a research project. While a poster can be effective alone, a presenter at a planned gathering enhances the poster
by engaging interested visitors in dialogues that: 1) explain the research, 2) expand the provided information, and 3)
ensure the visitor leaves with the desired “take-home” message about the project.
In addition, a scientific poster is given: 1) to serve as a basis for structured communication, 2) to convey findings in
scientific research, 3) to share ideas with colleagues, 4) to receive criticism and constructive input to the project, 5) to
serve as an alternative to longer oral presentations, and 6) to become familiar on how to organize and effectively
present research data.
(Modified from K.L. Sutphin, Summer Program in Computational Biology Seminar Series, UMBC College of Natural
and Mathematical Sciences)
The general format of a scientific poster follows the one of a scientific research paper. However, a scientific poster
does not require as many details as a scientific research paper does; therefore you should minimize the text and
maximize illustrations and schematics. In addition, ensure you practice your presentation in front of an audience as
you will need to formally present your poster in front of the class in 6 minutes.
Poor/Needs Improvement
(0-75%)
Approaches expectations
(75-90%)
Meets Expectations
(90-100%)
Overall Format
(10 points)
Title and Names
(3 points)
Abstract
(5 points)
Introduction:
Prose
(10 points)
Materials and
Methods
(8 points)
-Panels poorly mounted on poster board
-Panels carelessly cut and not organized
logically
-Poster uses font that is too small or too
big
-Poster is not viewer-friendly and not
professional
(0-7.50 points)
-Title or names missing
-Title does not include results
-Title does not include affiliation
-Title font is too small
(0-2.25 points)
-Abstract excludes relevance, methods,
hypothesis and results
-Abstract is not coherent
(0-3.75 points)
-Background mostly irrelevant to
hypothesis and does not clearly lead to
hypothesis
-Hypothesis unclear
-The reason the hypothesis was
proposed is not stated or unclear
-Poor logic and paragraphing
-Introduction too wordy
-Introduction does not include
schematics
-Text too long
(0-7.50 points)
-Not written using passive voice
-Not written using past tense
-Unclear, lengthy description of study
-Includes unnecessary details
-Lists materials
-Does not explain experimental design
-Text too long
(0-6.00 points)
-Panels somewhat poorly mounted
on poster board
-Panels somewhat carelessly cut and
somewhat organized illogically
-Poster uses font that is a little too
small or big
-Poster is somewhat viewer-friendly
but not professional
-Poster is not viewer-friendly but
somewhat professional
(7.50-9.00 points)
-Title poorly worded
-Title includes minor error
-Title font is somewhat too small
(2.25-2.70 points)
-Abstract is somewhat wordy and
long in summarizing all of research
-Abstract is somewhat unclear
(3.75-4.50 points)
-Background mostly relevant to
hypothesis and mostly
clearly leads to hypothesis
-Hypothesis mostly clear
-The reason the hypothesis was
proposed is somewhat unclear
-Acceptable logic and paragraphing
-Introduction somewhat wordy
-Introduction includes inappropriate
schematics
-Text somewhat too long
(7.50-9.00 points)
-Mostly written using passive voice
and past tense
-Mostly clear description
-Includes some needless details
-Explains most important
experimental design aspects
-Text somewhat too long
(6.00-7.20 points)
-Multiple panels mounted on a
poster board
-Panels precisely cut and
organized logically (see demo.
poster from previous students)
-Poster uses appropriate
subheadings (Intro. and Hyp.,
M&M, Results, Discussion,
Acknowledgment, and
References)
-Poster uses appropriate font
(9.00-10.00 points)
-Title states conclusion
-Authors appropriately cited
-Title font is appropriate
(2.70-3.00 points)
-Abstract is concise and
summarizes all of research
-Abstract is coherent and clear
(4.50-5.00 points)
-All background relevant to
hypothesis and clearly leads to
hypothesis
-Hypothesis clear
-The reason the hypothesis was
proposed is clear
-Excellent logic and paragraphing
-Introduction is well condensed
-Introduction includes appropriate
schematics
-Avoided long blocks of text
(9.00-10.00 points)
-Used passive voice
-Used past tense
-Clear description of study
-Concise description of study
-Avoids unnecessary details
-Clearly explains design
-Avoided long blocks of text
(7.20-8.00 points)
53
Results
(18 points)
Conclusion and
Discussion
(12 points)
In-text citation
(8 points)
and penalty points
Acknowledgements
(3 points)
References
(8 points)
and penalty points
Experimental Design
and Cohesiveness
(5 points)
Oral presentation
(10 points)
-Not written using active voice and
present tense
-Prose summary of study absent
-Prose summary of study incoherent
-Prose summary includes discussion of
hypothesis
-Prose summary does not cite table(s)
and figure(s)
-Raw data not included
-Inappropriate figure(s) included
-No figure(s) included
-Text too long
(0-13.50 points)
-Text too long
-Incorrectly states that hypothesis was
supported or rejected
-Why hypothesis was supported or
rejected not explained
-Discussion of larger context absent
-Incoherent attempt to place results in
larger context
-Alternative interpretations absent
-Discussion of sources of error absent
-No future studies
(0-9.00 points)
-Fewer than 5 references (-10% each)
-Incorrect citation format (-5% each)
-Non-academic sources (-10% each)
-Background inappropriately located
(0-6.00 points)
-Acknowledgements frivolous or absent
(0-2.25 points)
-Fewer that 5 references (-10% each)
-Literature uses non-CSE or non-APA
format (-5% each)
-Literature cited section absent
-Literature citations ordered not
alphabetically by author (-5% each)
(0-6.00 points)
-Demonstrates little understanding of
study
-Poster incoherent, not logically
consistent, and/or poorly written
(0-3.75 points)
-Attire not acceptable and general
manner not professional
- Illogical and non- orderly presentation
of the information
-Formal presentation too short or too
long ( 7 minutes)
-Poor speaking skills
-Demonstrate little understanding of the
research
-“Take home” message is not
emphasized
-Poor answers to questions
(0-7.50 points)
-Mostly written using active voice
and present tense
-Mostly clear prose summary of
study
-Presents some (not all) raw data -
Includes figure(s) that illustrate
relevant trends/results but are in
some small way inappropriate
-Text somewhat too long
(13.50-16.20 points)
-Text somewhat too long
-Does not explain why hypothesis
was supported or rejected very
clearly
-Results ineffectively placed in
larger context
-Results poorly linked to Intro.
-Alternative interpretations
discussed, but unlikely
-Some significant sources of error
not discussed
-Future studies somewhat discussed
(9.00-10.80 points)
-Minor incorrect citations (place
and format)
(6.00-7.20 points)
-Ackn. rather well written
(2.25-2.70 points)
-Some literature citations in CSE or
APA format, others in inappropriate
format
(6.00-7.20 points)
-Demonstrates some understanding
of the study
-Poster mostly coherent, and
logically consistent
-Paper mostly well written
(3.75-4.50 points)
-Attire and general manner
somewhat acceptable/professional
- Somewhat logical and orderly
presentation of the information
-Formal presentation a little under or
over 6 minutes
-Mediocre speaking skills
-Demonstrate some understanding
-“Take home” message is somewhat
emphasized
-Mediocre answers to questions
(7.50-9.00 points)
-Written using active voice and
present tense
-Clear prose summary of data
-Prose summary cites table(s) and
figure(s)
-Clearly presents raw data
-Includes figure(s) that clearly
illustrate relevant trends/results
-Includes figure(s) that have
appropriately labeled axes and
titles
-Avoided long blocks of text
(16.20-18.00 points)
-Avoided long blocks of text
-Provides a “take home” message
using bullets
-Correctly states that hypothesis
was supported or rejected
-Clearly explains why hypothesis
was supported or rejected
-Results placed in larger context
-Results placed in context of
background outlined in Intro.
-Reasonable alternative
interpretations discussed
-Sources of error discussed
-Future studies discussed
extensively
(10.80-12.00 points)
-At least 5 references
-All sources are academic
-Correctly cited references (place
and format: CSE or APA)
(7.20-8.00 points)
-Acknowledgements well written
(2.70-3.00 points)
-Literature cited present
-Literature uses CSE or APA
format
-Literature citations ordered
appropriately (alphabetically by
author)
(7.20-8.00 points)
-Clearly demonstrates an
understanding of the study
(including background)
-Poster coherent and logically
consistent and well written
(4.50-5.00 points)
-Acceptable dressing attire and
general professional manner
- Logical and orderly presentation
of the information
-Formal presentation in allotted
time (6 minutes)
- Good speaking skills
-Perfect understanding of the
research
-“Take home” message is
emphasized
-Good answers to questions
(9.00-10.00 points)
Grand total: ----------------------------
54
Peer-review (20 points, 2 x 10 points each)
Peer-review of 1 st poster
Reviewer name: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Poster authors: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Overall Format
(10 points)
Title and Names
(3 points)
Abstract
(5 points)
Introduction:
Prose
(10 points)
Materials and
Methods
(8 points)
Results
(18 points)
Poor/Needs Improvement
(0-75%)
-Panels poorly mounted on poster
board
-Panels carelessly cut and not
organized logically
-Poster uses font that is too small or
too big
-Poster is not viewer-friendly and not
professional
(0-7.50 points)
-Title or names missing
-Title does not include results
-Title does not include affiliation
-Title font is too small
(0-2.25 points)
-Abstract excludes relevance,
methods, hypothesis and results
-Abstract is not coherent
(0-3.75 points)
-Background mostly irrelevant to
hypothesis and does not clearly lead
to hypothesis
-Hypothesis unclear
-The reason the hypothesis was
proposed is not stated or unclear
-Poor logic and paragraphing
-Introduction too wordy
-Introduction does not include
schematics
-Text too long
(0-7.50 points)
-Not written using passive voice
-Not written using past tense
-Unclear, lengthy description of study
-Includes unnecessary details
-Lists materials
-Does not explain experimental design
-Text too long
(0-6.00 points)
-Not written using active voice and
present tense
-Prose summary of study absent
-Prose summary of study incoherent
-Prose summary includes discussion
of hypothesis
-Prose summary does not cite table(s)
and figure(s)
-Raw data not included
-Inappropriate figure(s) included
Approaches expectations
(75-90%)
-Panels somewhat poorly mounted
on poster board
-Panels somewhat carelessly cut
and somewhat organized
illogically
-Poster uses font that is a little too
small or big
-Poster is somewhat viewerfriendly
but not professional
-Poster is not viewer-friendly but
somewhat professional
(7.50-9.00 points)
-Title poorly worded
-Title includes minor error
-Title font is somewhat too small
(2.25-2.70 points)
-Abstract is somewhat wordy and
long in summarizing all of
research
-Abstract is somewhat unclear
(3.75-4.50 points)
-Background mostly relevant to
hypothesis and mostly
clearly leads to hypothesis
-Hypothesis mostly clear
-The reason the hypothesis was
proposed is somewhat unclear
-Acceptable logic and
paragraphing
-Introduction somewhat wordy
-Introduction includes
inappropriate schematics
-Text somewhat too long
(7.50-9.00 points)
-Mostly written using passive
voice and past tense
-Mostly clear description
-Includes some needless details
-Explains most important
experimental design aspects
-Text somewhat too long
(6.00-7.20 points)
-Mostly written using active voice
and present tense
-Mostly clear prose summary of
study
-Presents some (not all) raw data -
Includes figure(s) that illustrate
relevant trends/results but are in
some small way inappropriate
-Text somewhat too long
Meets Expectations
(90-100%)
-Multiple panels mounted on a
poster board
-Panels precisely cut and
organized logically (see demo.
poster from previous students)
-Poster uses appropriate
subheadings (Intro. and Hyp.,
M&M, Results, Discussion,
Acknowledgment, and
References)
-Poster uses appropriate font
-Poster is viewer-friendly but
yet professional
(9.00-10.00 points)
-Title states conclusion
-Authors appropriately cited
-Title font is appropriate
(2.70-3.00 points)
-Abstract is concise and
summarizes all of research
-Abstract is coherent and clear
(4.50-5.00 points)
-All background relevant to
hypothesis and clearly leads to
hypothesis
-Hypothesis clear
-The reason the hypothesis was
proposed is clear
-Excellent logic and
paragraphing
-Introduction is well condensed
-Introduction includes
appropriate schematics
-Avoided long blocks of text
(9.00-10.00 points)
-Used passive voice
-Used past tense
-Clear description of study
-Concise description of study
-Avoids unnecessary details
-Clearly explains design
-Avoided long blocks of text
(7.20-8.00 points)
-Written using active voice and
present tense
-Clear prose summary of data
-Prose summary cites table(s)
and figure(s)
-Clearly presents raw data
-Includes figure(s) that clearly
illustrate relevant trends/results
-Includes figure(s) that have
appropriately labeled axes and
55
Conclusion and
Discussion
(12 points)
In-text citation
(8 points)
and penalty points
Acknowledgements
(3 points)
References
(8 points)
and penalty points
Experimental
Design and
Cohesiveness
(5 points)
Oral presentation
(10 points)
-No figure(s) included
-Text too long
(0-13.50 points) (13.50-16.20 points)
-Text somewhat too long
-Does not explain why hypothesis
was supported or rejected very
clearly
-Results ineffectively placed in
larger context
-Results poorly linked to Intro.
-Alternative interpretations
discussed, but unlikely
-Some significant sources of error
not discussed
-Future studies somewhat
discussed
-Text too long
-Incorrectly states that hypothesis was
supported or rejected
-Why hypothesis was supported or
rejected not explained
-Discussion of larger context absent
-Incoherent attempt to place results in
larger context
-Alternative interpretations absent
-Discussion of sources of error absent
-No future studies
(0-9.00 points)
-Fewer than 5 references (-10% each)
-Incorrect citation format (-5% each)
-Non-academic sources (-10% each)
-Background inappropriately located
(0-6.00 points)
-Acknowledgements frivolous or
absent
(0-2.25 points)
-Fewer that 5 references (-10% each)
-Literature uses non-CSE or non-APA
format (-5% each)
-Literature cited section absent
-Literature citations ordered not
alphabetically by author (-5% each)
(0-6.00 points)
-Demonstrates little understanding of
study
-Poster incoherent, not logically
consistent, and/or poorly written
(0-3.75 points)
-Attire not acceptable and general
manner not professional
- Illogical and non- orderly
presentation of the information
-Formal presentation too short or too
long ( 7 minutes)
-Poor speaking skills
-Demonstrate little understanding of
the research
-“Take home” message is not
emphasized
-Poor answers to questions
(0-7.50 points)
(9.00-10.80 points)
-Minor incorrect citations (place
and format)
(6.00-7.20 points)
-Ackn. rather well written
(2.25-2.70 points)
-Some literature citations in CSE
or APA format, others in
inappropriate format
(6.00-7.20 points)
-Demonstrates some understanding
of the study
-Poster mostly coherent, and
logically consistent
-Paper mostly well written
(3.75-4.50 points)
-Attire and general manner
somewhat acceptable/professional
- Somewhat logical and orderly
presentation of the information
-Formal presentation a little under
or over 6 minutes
-Mediocre speaking skills
-Demonstrate some understanding
-“Take home” message is
somewhat emphasized
-Mediocre answers to questions
(7.50-9.00 points)
titles
-Avoided long blocks of text
(16.20-18.00 points)
-Avoided long blocks of text
-Provides a “take home”
message using bullets
-Correctly states that hypothesis
was supported or rejected
-Clearly explains why
hypothesis was supported or
rejected
-Results placed in larger context
-Results placed in context of
background outlined in Intro.
-Reasonable alternative
interpretations discussed
-Sources of error discussed
-Future studies discussed
extensively
(10.80-12.00 points)
-At least 5 references
-All sources are academic
-Correctly cited references
(place and format: CSE or
APA)
(7.20-8.00 points)
-Acknowledgements well
written
(2.70-3.00 points)
-Literature cited present
-Literature uses CSE or APA
format
-Literature citations ordered
appropriately (alphabetically by
author)
(7.20-8.00 points)
-Clearly demonstrates an
understanding of the study
(including background)
-Poster coherent and logically
consistent and well written
(4.50-5.00 points)
-Acceptable dressing attire and
general professional manner
- Logical and orderly
presentation of the information
-Formal presentation in allotted
time (6 minutes)
- Good speaking skills
-Perfect understanding of the
research
-“Take home” message is
emphasized
-Good answers to questions
(9.00-10.00 points)
56
Peer-review of 2 nd poster
Reviewer name: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Poster authors: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Overall Format
(10 points)
Title and Names
(3 points)
Abstract
(5 points)
Introduction:
Prose
(10 points)
Materials and
Methods
(8 points)
Results
(18 points)
Poor/Needs Improvement
(0-75%)
-Panels poorly mounted on poster
board
-Panels carelessly cut and not
organized logically
-Poster uses font that is too small or
too big
-Poster is not viewer-friendly and not
professional
(0-7.50 points)
-Title or names missing
-Title does not include results
-Title does not include affiliation
-Title font is too small
(0-2.25 points)
-Abstract excludes relevance,
methods, hypothesis and results
-Abstract is not coherent
(0-3.75 points)
-Background mostly irrelevant to
hypothesis and does not clearly lead
to hypothesis
-Hypothesis unclear
-The reason the hypothesis was
proposed is not stated or unclear
-Poor logic and paragraphing
-Introduction too wordy
-Introduction does not include
schematics
-Text too long
(0-7.50 points)
-Not written using passive voice
-Not written using past tense
-Unclear, lengthy description of study
-Includes unnecessary details
-Lists materials
-Does not explain experimental design
-Text too long
(0-6.00 points)
-Not written using active voice and
present tense
-Prose summary of study absent
-Prose summary of study incoherent
-Prose summary includes discussion
of hypothesis
-Prose summary does not cite table(s)
and figure(s)
-Raw data not included
-Inappropriate figure(s) included
-No figure(s) included
Approaches expectations
(75-90%)
-Panels somewhat poorly mounted
on poster board
-Panels somewhat carelessly cut
and somewhat organized
illogically
-Poster uses font that is a little too
small or big
-Poster is somewhat viewerfriendly
but not professional
-Poster is not viewer-friendly but
somewhat professional
(7.50-9.00 points)
-Title poorly worded
-Title includes minor error
-Title font is somewhat too small
(2.25-2.70 points)
-Abstract is somewhat wordy and
long in summarizing all of
research
-Abstract is somewhat unclear
(3.75-4.50 points)
-Background mostly relevant to
hypothesis and mostly
clearly leads to hypothesis
-Hypothesis mostly clear
-The reason the hypothesis was
proposed is somewhat unclear
-Acceptable logic and
paragraphing
-Introduction somewhat wordy
-Introduction includes
inappropriate schematics
-Text somewhat too long
(7.50-9.00 points)
-Mostly written using passive
voice and past tense
-Mostly clear description
-Includes some needless details
-Explains most important
experimental design aspects
-Text somewhat too long
(6.00-7.20 points)
-Mostly written using active voice
and present tense
-Mostly clear prose summary of
study
-Presents some (not all) raw data -
Includes figure(s) that illustrate
relevant trends/results but are in
some small way inappropriate
-Text somewhat too long
Meets Expectations
(90-100%)
-Multiple panels mounted on a
poster board
-Panels precisely cut and
organized logically (see demo.
poster from previous students)
-Poster uses appropriate
subheadings (Intro. and Hyp.,
M&M, Results, Discussion,
Acknowledgment, and
References)
-Poster uses appropriate font
-Poster is viewer-friendly but
yet professional
(9.00-10.00 points)
-Title states conclusion
-Authors appropriately cited
-Title font is appropriate
(2.70-3.00 points)
-Abstract is concise and
summarizes all of research
-Abstract is coherent and clear
(4.50-5.00 points)
-All background relevant to
hypothesis and clearly leads to
hypothesis
-Hypothesis clear
-The reason the hypothesis was
proposed is clear
-Excellent logic and
paragraphing
-Introduction is well condensed
-Introduction includes
appropriate schematics
-Avoided long blocks of text
(9.00-10.00 points)
-Used passive voice
-Used past tense
-Clear description of study
-Concise description of study
-Avoids unnecessary details
-Clearly explains design
-Avoided long blocks of text
(7.20-8.00 points)
-Written using active voice and
present tense
-Clear prose summary of data
-Prose summary cites table(s)
and figure(s)
-Clearly presents raw data
-Includes figure(s) that clearly
illustrate relevant trends/results
-Includes figure(s) that have
appropriately labeled axes and
titles
57
Conclusion and
Discussion
(12 points)
In-text citation
(8 points)
and penalty points
Acknowledgements
(3 points)
References
(8 points)
and penalty points
Experimental
Design and
Cohesiveness
(5 points)
Oral presentation
(10 points)
-Text too long
(0-13.50 points) (13.50-16.20 points)
-Text somewhat too long
-Text too long
-Does not explain why hypothesis
-Incorrectly states that hypothesis was
was supported or rejected very
supported or rejected
clearly
-Why hypothesis was supported or
-Results ineffectively placed in
rejected not explained
larger context
-Discussion of larger context absent
-Results poorly linked to Intro.
-Incoherent attempt to place results in
-Alternative interpretations
larger context
discussed, but unlikely
-Alternative interpretations absent
-Some significant sources of error
-Discussion of sources of error absent
not discussed
-No future studies
-Future studies somewhat
discussed
(0-9.00 points)
-Fewer than 5 references (-10% each)
-Incorrect citation format (-5% each)
-Non-academic sources (-10% each)
-Background inappropriately located
(0-6.00 points)
-Acknowledgements frivolous or
absent
(0-2.25 points)
-Fewer that 5 references (-10% each)
-Literature uses non-CSE or non-APA
format (-5% each)
-Literature cited section absent
-Literature citations ordered not
alphabetically by author (-5% each)
(0-6.00 points)
-Demonstrates little understanding of
study
-Poster incoherent, not logically
consistent, and/or poorly written
(0-3.75 points)
-Attire not acceptable and general
manner not professional
- Illogical and non- orderly
presentation of the information
-Formal presentation too short or too
long ( 7 minutes)
-Poor speaking skills
-Demonstrate little understanding of
the research
-“Take home” message is not
emphasized
-Poor answers to questions
(0-7.50 points)
(9.00-10.80 points)
-Minor incorrect citations (place
and format)
(6.00-7.20 points)
-Ackn. rather well written
(2.25-2.70 points)
-Some literature citations in CSE
or APA format, others in
inappropriate format
(6.00-7.20 points)
-Demonstrates some understanding
of the study
-Poster mostly coherent, and
logically consistent
-Paper mostly well written
(3.75-4.50 points)
-Attire and general manner
somewhat acceptable/professional
- Somewhat logical and orderly
presentation of the information
-Formal presentation a little under
or over 6 minutes
-Mediocre speaking skills
-Demonstrate some understanding
-“Take home” message is
somewhat emphasized
-Mediocre answers to questions
(7.50-9.00 points)
-Avoided long blocks of text
(16.20-18.00 points)
-Avoided long blocks of text
-Provides a “take home”
message using bullets
-Correctly states that hypothesis
was supported or rejected
-Clearly explains why
hypothesis was supported or
rejected
-Results placed in larger context
-Results placed in context of
background outlined in Intro.
-Reasonable alternative
interpretations discussed
-Sources of error discussed
-Future studies discussed
extensively
(10.80-12.00 points)
-At least 5 references
-All sources are academic
-Correctly cited references
(place and format: CSE or
APA)
(7.20-8.00 points)
-Acknowledgements well
written
(2.70-3.00 points)
-Literature cited present
-Literature uses CSE or APA
format
-Literature citations ordered
appropriately (alphabetically by
author)
(7.20-8.00 points)
-Clearly demonstrates an
understanding of the study
(including background)
-Poster coherent and logically
consistent and well written
(4.50-5.00 points)
-Acceptable dressing attire and
general professional manner
- Logical and orderly
presentation of the information
-Formal presentation in allotted
time (6 minutes)
- Good speaking skills
-Perfect understanding of the
research
-“Take home” message is
emphasized
-Good answers to questions
(9.00-10.00 points)
58
APPENDIX Ie
Integrative Core: Diversity and Cultural Tradition, RCC 400D RU04, Fall 2011
Medical Anthropology: An Inclusive Approach of Health, Illness and
Healing in the World
10 hours of Community-Based Learning (CBL) Research Required
Marie-dominique Franco, Ph. D.
Department of Biology; Pomponio Science Center, Room #223; mfranco@regis.edu
(This syllabus may be subject to changes throughout the semester)
Cheyenne Medicine Man Jesus as a Healer Neonatal ICU (Biomedicine)
General Information
The seminar sessions meet two times a week on Mondays and Wednesdays from 9:00 am to 10:15 am in
the Pomponio Science Center Room #313 unless otherwise mentioned. My office hours are on
Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays from 8:00 am to 9:00 am, on Wednesdays from 2:30 to 4:30 pm, and
by appointments. My academic website is http://academic.regis.edu/mfranco/ where you can find a link
to the course and its material. The Center for Service Learning is located in Main Hall Room 214. The
Add/Drop deadline is Tuesday September 6 th , 2011 and the Withdrawal deadline is Friday November
4 th , 2011. Note: All e-mail communications will be sent to your Regis account.
Course Books and Literature
• Brown PJ. 2010. Understanding and Applying Medical Anthropology. Mayfield Publishing
Company/Mountain View, CA.
• Farmer P. 2006. AIDS and Accusation. University of California Press/Berkeley, CA.
• Fadiman A. 1997. The spirit catches you and you fall down. Farrar, Straus and Giroux/New
York.
• Primary research literature (Ong paper) and selected documents will be posted on the course web
site as pdf files.
59
Course Description
The general purpose of the Integrative Core courses is to address several elements of the Core
Philosophy Statement as indicated in the following Intended Learning Outcomes:
• Knowledge of diverse cultures, perspectives, and belief systems
• Knowledge of arts, sciences, and humanities
• Ability to think critically
• Ability to communicate effectively
• Ability to use contemporary technology
• Commitment to ethical and social responsibilities
• Commitment to leadership and service to others
• Commitment to learning as a lifelong endeavor
This course will specifically address Diversity and Cultural Tradition through the study of the diversity
of persons and cultures, their perspectives and views, histories and traditions, and the complexity of
these relationships in the emerging century. In particular, this seminar course will examine the issues of
health, illness and health care in the world in light of cultural, religious and socio-economic diversities.
Health care can be generally defined as the care, services and supplies related to the mental and physical
health of an individual. Health care includes, but is not limited to, preventive, diagnostic, therapeutic,
rehabilitative and counseling services and also includes sale and dispensing of prescription drugs and
medical devices. This seminar will examine the cross-cultural perspectives on health, illness, healing
and religion and will also examine critical issues in global health. The differences and similarities in
health, healing and religion in various countries including the United States of America will be studied
through lectures, reading, research, discussion, writing, and guest speakers.
In addition, students will have to engage with the community through Community-Based Learning
(CBL) research activities that will incorporate experiential assignments grounding student learning in
the context and content of what they encounter in particular community settings. Note: A minimum of
ten hours of CBL activities is required and will be monitored three times during the semester.
Course Objectives
The objectives of this seminar are to:
• Advance students’ understanding of cross-cultural and cross-religious perspectives on health,
illness and healing
• Advance students’ understanding of health care systems diversity in the world by focusing on
geographic and civic data, major disease/condition outbreaks/occurrence, health care provision
and distribution, health care expenditure and health care human resources
• Foster students’ critical analysis of health care systems with respect to human dignity, culture
and religion
• Engage students with the community through Community-Based Learning research activities.
Attendance
This is a discussion-based course; therefore attendance is required and will be taken during each class
period. If you miss three class periods without an official university-sanctioned excuse, your grade will
be reduced by one letter grade and your grade will be reduced by an additional letter grade for each
absence beyond three.
60
Excused Absence
Serious illness documented with health care provider note (not a regularly scheduled appointment),
medical emergencies, family emergencies and NCAA athletic competition are reasons for excused
absences. Assignments missed for an excused absence will be averaged out of your final grade after
providing me with an official letter of explanation. Any unexcused missed assignments will result in a 0
grade for this particular assignment. If you are a member of the NCAA athletic team and must miss an
assignment due date for an athletic competition, you must present me with an official schedule provided
by your coach during the first week of the semester and must remind me of your absence as the date
approaches.
Participation
As a seminar course, it is a basic assumption that students will participate actively in discussions in
class, as non-participation disrupts the class dynamics, therefore participation will be monitored in class.
Students who consistently do not participate will have their final grade reduced by a letter grade at the
end of the semester.
Community-Based Learning (CBL) Research Requirement
A minimum of ten hours of Community-Based Learning research activities is required for this course;
these hours will be monitored by the Office of Center for Service Learning three times during the
semester. Students who fall below this number will have their final grade reduced by a letter grade at
the end of the semester.
Inappropriate Academic Conduct
Academic dishonesty such as plagiarism and cheating will be severely punished as it will result in the
failure of the course (grade F) and the offense will be reported to the Biology Department Chair and to
the Dean’s Office for documentation that could lead to expulsion from Regis College. The following is
an excerpt from the Regis University Bulletin that I will enforce: "Consistent with the College's Academic
Integrity Policy, I will report all violations of this course's academic integrity policy to the Dean's office.
Students who have committed multiple instances of academic dishonesty can be subject to institutional
penalties like probation, suspension, or expulsion, in addition to the penalties for this course." In addition:
• Cell phones use such as texting will result in minus 10 points each time from the grand total
points. Cell phones and pagers should be turned off. If you need to be contacted for an
emergency situation, you should notify me at the beginning of the class period.
• Promptness is mandatory; any late coming will result in minus 10 points each from the grand
total points. Indeed, tardiness is not acceptable as it disturbs class dynamics.
Disability
If you have a documented disability requiring academic adjustments for this course, please contact the
Disability Services Office (303-458-4941, disability@regis.edu). The Disability Services office will
review your documentation with you and determine appropriate, reasonable accommodations.
Following the meeting with Disability Services personnel, please make an appointment with me to
discuss your accommodation request in light of the course requirement.
Regis Writing Center
The Writing Center offers Regis College students immediate and personal feedback on their writing and
answers to questions about grammar, documentation, and formatting. Peer writing consultants help at
61
any point in the writing process, from brainstorming for ideas to organizing a draft to polishing the final
version. The Writing Center is a very popular service, so appointments are strongly recommended.
Drop by Loyola 1 or call (303) 458-4039 for more information. More specifically, I am requesting that
you visit the Writing Center before you turn in you draft paper, a notification of your visit will be sent to
me for points.
Dayton Memorial Library
Reference librarians provide assistance in locating facts, refining a research strategy, focusing a topic,
selecting the appropriate databases or other resources, or interpreting research results. More in-depth
assistance, called a "Research Consultation," is available by appointment for larger research projects.
More specifically, I am requesting that you visit the library before you turn in you draft paper, a
notification of your visit will be sent to me for points.
Grading
Your final course grade will be assigned based on the percentage of points earned out of a total of 700
points. In addition, I may occasionally give pop quizzes. Each of them will be worth a certain amount
of points, to be determined at the end of the course. All assignments due dates are indicated at the
beginning of the semester: therefore you need to make sure you will be on campus these days. Any late
assignment will be automatically down-graded a letter grade per late day.
Entry slips
150 points (15 x 10 points)
Visit to the Library (draft paper)
15 points
Visit to the Writing Center (draft paper) 15 points
Annotated Bibliography Assignment
50 points
Draft Paper Outline
20 points
Final Paper Outline
30 points
Draft Paper
100 points
Peer-Reviews
20 points (2 x 10 points)
Final Paper
200 points
Paper Presentation
50 points
Questions on Presentations
10 points
TBL Peer-evaluation
40 points
--------------
Total points
700 points
Penalty points (deducted from the final grade)
Attendance: One letter grade per three unexcused absences and an additional letter grade for each
additional unexcused absence. Participation: One letter grade removed from your final grade if nonparticipation
is constant. CBL requirement: One letter grade removed from your final grade if you have
less than fifteen hours. Turnitin: Assignments will not be graded (i.e. will receive a zero grade) if not
submitted to Turnitin. Single-sidedness: All assignments MUST be turned-in double-sided NOT singlesided,
assignment will not be graded if single-sided (i.e. will receive a zero grade).
A 100-92.5 % A - 92.4-89.5 % B+ 89.4-85.5 % B- 85.4-82.5 %
B - 82.4-79.5 % C+ 79.4-75.5 % C 75.4-72.5 % C - 72.4-69.5 %
D+ 69.4-65.5 % D 65.4-62.5 % D - 62.4-59.5 % F
Date Topic Reading Home Assignment
Mon. Aug. 29
Wed. Aug. 31
Introduction to the Course including CBL 1 and TBL 1 (Team forming)
Introduction to Paper and CBL topics (Melissa Nix, Curriculum & Intercultural
Programming Director, Center for Service Learning) and Report on ES1
Entry Slip 1 (T: Turnitin)
(personal experience)
Mon. Sep. 05
Wed. Sep. 07
No class: Labor Day
History of Diseases and Current Global Health Slides – Reading Discussion UAMA 2 #1 Entry Slip 2 (T)
Mon. Sep. 12 History of Diseases and Current Global Health Slides – Reading Discussion
UAMA #2, 3 Entry Slip 3 (T)
Wed. Sep. 14 Selection of Paper Topic (Melissa Nix) – Reading Discussion
Mon. Sep. 19 Visit to a GreenLeaf Farm (Damien Thompson, Regis College Sociology Professor) UAMA #9, 10 Entry Slip 4 (T)
Wed. Sep. 21 Workshop on Thesis Construction - (Jan Turner, DML Reference Librarian)
Mon. Sep. 26
Wed. Sep. 28
Health, Culture and Religion Slides – Reading Discussion
Health, Culture and Religion Slides – Reading Discussion
UAMA #12, 13,14
UAMA #15, 16, 17
Entry Slip 5 (T)
Entry Slip 6 (T)
Mon. Oct. 03
Wed. Oct. 05
Mon. Oct. 10
Wed. Oct. 12
Mon. Oct. 17
Wed. Oct. 19
Mon. Oct. 24
Wed. Oct. 26
Mon. Oct. 31
Wed. Nov. 02
Mon. Nov. 07
Wed. Nov. 09
Mon. Nov. 14
Wed. Nov. 16
Mon. Nov. 21
Wed. Nov.24
Mon. Nov. 28
Wed. Nov. 30
Mon. Dec. 05
Wed. Dec. 07
Fri. Dec. 16
Critical Issues in Global Health: America - Reading Discussion
Sections of the Act
(The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, 01/15/2010)
Refugees Panel (Melissa Nix)
Reflection on Panel and Papers (Melissa Nix)
Critical Issues in Global Health: Africa - Buruli Movie (30 min) and Reading Discussion UAMA #44
No class: Fall Break
Workshop on Citing Sources (Jan Turner)
Entry Slip 7 (T)
Draft Paper Outline (T)
Final Paper Outline (T)
Entry Slip 8 (T) - CBL Worklog
Annotated Bibliography (T)
Public Health Guest Speaker (Dr. Renee King, Emergency Medicine Physician at UCH)
Critical Issues in Global Health: America - Reading Discussion UAMA #26 Entry Slip 9 (T)
Critical Issues in Global Health: Eastern Mediterranean - Reading Discussion
UAMA #46 Entry Slip 10 (T)
Critical Issues in Global Health: Europe – Reading Discussion
UAMA #45 Entry Slip 11 (T)
Critical Issues in Global Health: South-East Asia – Reading Discussion
Fadiman Book 3 Entry Slip 12 on full book (T)
Critical Issues in Global Health: Western Pacific – Reading Discussion
Ong Paper Entry Slip 13 - CBL Worklog
Globalization and Sustainability – Pachamama Movie (20 min) and Reading Discussion UAMA #18 Entry Slip 14 (T)
Reflection on Papers (Melissa Nix)
Draft Paper (3 copies) - (T)
Paper Conference (Dr. Franco’s Office in the Science Building #223)
No class: Thanksgiving Break
Students’ Presentations (5 presentations of 10’ each and 5’ of questions)
Students’ Presentations (5 presentations of 10’ each and 5’ of questions)
Students’ Presentations (5 presentations of 10’ each and 5’ of questions)
CBL Worklog (needs 10 hours)
Students’ Presentations (5 presentations of 10’ each and 5’ of questions) Farmer Book 3 Entry Slip 15 on full book (T)
Final Paper with Graded Draft and Graded Grid due at 5:00 pm in the Drop-Off Box Outside my Office – Turnitin
1 CBL is the acronym for Community-Based Learning and TBL is the acronym for Team-Based Learning.
2
UAMA is an acronym for the “Understanding and Applying Medical Anthropology” book.
3
Students can read “AIDS and accusation” by Farmer and “The spirit catches you and you fall down” by Fadiman at their own pace. It is only required that these books be fully read at the time of
their respective discussion date.
63
APPENDIX A: INSTRUCTIONS TO ASSIGNMENTS
Entry Slips (10 points each)
Entry slips should include the citation of the paper (using appropriate citation format), a brief (2-3 paragraphs)
summary of the reading/s and 3 questions or opinions based on the reading/s. All entry slips must be wordprocessed,
with your name on top of the page, a Citation section heading with the citation of the paper using
appropriate format, a Summary section heading and a Questions section heading and should not excess one page
in length when associated with one article. If you have read from several articles or book chapters, your entry slip
should be divided accordingly and should then exceed one-page length (e.g., 3 articles would produce an entry
slip with 3 Citation section headings, 3 Summary section headings and 3 Questions section headings).
RCC400D Entry Slip “corresponding number”
“Your name”
Citation: Brown, P.J., Barrett, R.L., and Padilla, M.B. (1998). Medical Anthropology: An Introduction to the
Fields. In: Brown, P., editor. Understanding and Applying Medical Anthropology. Mountain View: Mayfield
Publishing Company. p. 10-19.
Summary:
Write a brief summary (2-3 paragraphs) of the reading.
Questions:
Write 3 questions/opinions based on the reading using bullet format.
The points will be allocated as follows: 2 points for the citation, 5.75 points for the summary, and 2.25 points for
the questions. 20% penalty points will be removed for each direct quote and a zero grade will be assigned if the
Entry Slip is not submitted to Turnitin in addition of being printed for the due date.
Discussion (can only loose points)
The following items are norms and values for discussion:
• Be respectful to the opinions of others in the classroom.
• When disagreeing with a statement, use constructive language opposed to criticism as “that’s wrong”.
Ex: “I disagree or understand but …”
• Be critical, using constructive language.
• Wait your turn to speak as all opinions are equally valid.
• Listen intently when others are speaking.
• Use appropriate language that is not offensive.
What is an Academic Source?
1) Except for some general sources that will be listed later, your paper should only be documented by academic
sources that:
• Are either books or articles (papers) that report original researches.
• Are scholarly sources of information, written by either subject experts or scholars in their fields.
• Are reviewed (refereed) by an editorial board and revised before being accepted for publications.
• These sources can be found in textbooks, articles, encyclopedia or specialized data bases (library
instruction).
2) Although these website sources will not count toward your academic sources quota, you can use them in your
paper for general information such as demographics and statistics:
• WHO (World Health Organization, http://www.who.int/en/).
• CDC (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, http://www.cdc.gov/).
• NIH (National Institutes of Health, http://www.nih.gov/).
• The World Fact Book (https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/).
• SMA (Society for Medical Anthropology, http://www.medanthro.net/)
• SfAA (Society for Applied Anthropology, http://www.sfaa.net/).
- 64 -
3) You should use one of the two following citation formats throughout your paper (in-text citations and
References):
• APA, based on the recommendations of the American Psychological Association and used by many
journals in Psychology, Education and Social Sciences.
• CSE (name-year system), based on the recommendations of the Council of Science Editors and used by
many journals in Biology, Geology, Medicine, Chemistry, Mathematics and Physics.
Important Note: Remember that each academic source (and the ones I allowed you to use) should be cited twice,
in the body of the text when appropriate and in the References section at the end of the paper.
Important Note: Below your name, you should type the name of the format you are using, in order for me to
review accordingly. If no format is mentioned, you will loose all of the citation points (in-text and References
section).
Important Note: Do not hesitate to make appointments with a Reference Librarian (303-458-4031) and/or a
Writing Center Consultant (303-458-4039).
Important Note: The use of Wikipedia is absolutely forbidden in this course. It is acceptable to visit this site
for general information but you should go to the scholarly sources (when available, that is the problem) at the end
of the article and decide on their validity and pertinence. If you decide then, that these sources are relevant to
your paper, you can cite them.
4) Your interviews should be cited as follows:
• In-text, name of the person you interviewed and date (e.g., Smith M., 2007).
• In the References section, name of the person you interviewed, Personal (Telephone) interview, date (e.g.,
Smith M., Personal interview, August 7, 2007).
Research Paper Outline (20 points)
Your research paper should take a position on an issue related to health, healing, illness or health care in the
world, and should address cultural and religious contexts. The specific topic you choose needs to be approved
before you start your research.
Note: The points will be normalized for the final outline graded out of 30 points. The final outline will receive a
zero grade if both draft proposal and graded rubric are not attached to it.
Poor/Needs Improvement
(0-75%)
Approaches Expectations
(75-90%)
Meets Expectations
(90-100%)
Length (1 point) Below 1 page Between 1 and 2 pages 2 pages
Title/Author
(2 points)
Title is short and “catchy” or
unprofessional. Name is missing.
Title is poorly worded
Title is accurate and reflects thesis.
Name appears.
Introduction
(4 points)
Introduction fails to set the stage
for thesis and body text
Introduction is somewhat relevant to
thesis and body text
Introduction clearly sets the stage for
the thesis and body text
Thesis
(7 points)
Paragraphing
(6 points)
Thesis is absent/lacks clarity/focus
The thesis does not seem to reflect
the author’s point of view
Thesis is at the beginning of the
introduction
The paragraphs do not support or
reject the thesis
The paragraphs do not focus on a
single idea (argument or counterargument)
Thesis is somewhat clear/focused
It is not clear that the thesis reflects
the author’s point of view
Thesis appears randomly in the
introduction
Some paragraphs support or reject
the thesis
Some paragraph focus on a single
idea (argument or counter-argument)
while others do not
Thesis is clear and focused and relates
to the introduction
Thesis conveys author’s point of view
Thesis is at the end of the introduction
Each paragraph supports or rejects the
thesis
Each paragraph focuses on a single
idea (argument or counter-argument)
Subtotal Points/20: ---------
--
Additional Penalties
The introduction and thesis do not present the countries you are investigating: -20% -----------
The introduction/thesis does not address cross-cultural and cross-religious issues related to health: -20% -----------
Presence of direct quote: -20% each ----------
Total Points/20: -----------
- 65 -
Annotated Bibliography for six academic sources (50 points)
This is a formal bibliography that includes citations of sources with summary and evaluation information for each
source. Each student will research the paper topic agreed upon, using multiple academic sources. A minimum of
six sources should be used with at least four coming from primary research articles. The citation format should be
in APA only. The emphasis is on finding accurate, reliable sources and providing a clear summary and evaluation
for each source.
Content
(13 points)
Relative
Importance to
Subject
(13 points)
Annotation:
Includes all 6
points. See
explanation on
the following
pages
(12 points)
Conventions:
Proofreading,
Spelling,
Grammar,
APA Style
(12 points)
Meets Expectations
(90-100%)
Your sources are
interesting and
they are all clearly
related to your
topic.
You select a
variety of
academic sources
that are all written
at the appropriate
level for this
paper’s purpose.
The connection
between your
sources and your
topic are clear.
Your annotation
follows the 6
points and
provides the main
conclusions of
each source.
You correctly cite
at
least 6 sources
using the APA
style.
Approaches Expectations
(75-90%)
Your sources are
interesting and most
are clearly related to
your topic.
You select a variety of
academic sources and
most are written at the
appropriate level for
this paper’s purpose.
In most cases the
connection between
your source and the
topic is clear.
You clearly
summarize the main
conclusions of each of
your sources and
include most of the 6
points for annotations.
You cite at
least 6 sources
using the APA style
and there are a few
errors.
Needs Major Improvement
(50-75%)
Your sources cover your
topic, but they are less
interesting and the
relationship to your paper is
less clear.
The sources you
selected are less varied, but
most are written at the
appropriate level for this
project’s purpose. At times
the connection between the
sources and your topic is
unclear.
You clearly
summarize the main
conclusion of each of your
sources, but fail to include
most of the annotation
points.
You cite at least 6 sources
and try to use APA style,
but have some
difficulty.
Poor
(0-50%)
Few, if any, of your
sources are related
to your topic. You
seem to have no real
interest in your
paper.
You select mostly
one source type (i.e.,
books). Often the
connection is
unclear if there is
one at all.
You try to
summarize your
sources, but have
trouble focusing on
the main idea. You
make little or no
attempt to include
all 6 points for
annotations.
You cite at
least 6 using
your own citation
style or use APA
style but there are
many errors.
Academic
sources number
--
Additional Penalties
-10% per missing
source
-10% per missing source -10% per missing source -10% per missing source
Subtotal Points/50: ---------
Presence of direct quote: -20% each ----------
Total Points/50: ----------
- 66 -
- 67 -
- 68 -
Research Draft Paper (100 points), Bring 3 copies for in-class peer-review and graded
outline
The paper will not be accepted if neither 1) word-processed nor 2) stapled nor 3) one-and-a-half spaced nor 4)
written using an 11.5 font size nor 5) one-sided.
Poor/Needs Improvement
(0-75%)
Approaches Expectations
(75-90%)
Meets Expectations
(90-100%)
Body length
• 4 pages (excluding front • 5 pages (excluding front • 6 pages (excluding front page
(5 points max)
page and References
page and References section) and References section)
Any paper below 4
section)
pages will receive a -
50% penalty at the end
Front page
(4 points max)
If citation format is not
cited ALL citation
points will be removed
Introduction
(5 points max)
Thesis
(7 points max)
Paragraphing
(25 points max)
Critical thinking
and analysis
(15 points max)
Community-based
research (CBL)
(8 points max)
• Title is short and “catchy”
or unprofessional
• Name is missing
• Introduction fails to set the
stage for thesis and body
text and does not present
countries to be investigated
• Thesis is absent or lacks
clarity and focus
• The thesis does not reflect
the author’s point of view
• Thesis is at the beginning of
the introduction
• The paragraphs do not
support or reject the thesis
• The paragraphs are not
supported by academic
sources
• The paragraphs do not
focus on a single idea
(argument or counterargument)
• The discussion and support
of ideas are not clearly
organized and are
incoherent
• The transitions are abrupt
and illogical
• The author does not provide
concrete example but rather
remains very vague and
general
• The author does not address
potential objections to ideas
• The author fails to analyze
problems and remained
superficial
• Main arguments or counterarguments
are not
supported by CBL
components
• CBL components are
irrelevant to ideas presented
• Title is poorly worded • Title is accurate and reflects
thesis
• Name
• Citation format is clear (CSE
or APA)
• Introduction is somewhat
relevant to thesis and body
text and not fully present
countries to be investigated
• Thesis is somewhat clear and
focused
• It is unclear thesis reflects
the author’s point of view
• Thesis appears randomly in
the introduction
• Some paragraphs support or
reject the thesis
• Some paragraphs are
supported by academic
sources
• Some paragraph focus on a
single idea (argument or
counter-argument) while
others do not
• The discussion and support
of ideas are somewhat
clearly organized and
coherent
• Some transitions are abrupt
and illogical
• The author provides some
concrete examples
• The author somewhat
answers potential objections
to ideas
• Some personal opinions are
supported by academic
sources
• The author makes an effort
to analyze problems
• Some main arguments or
counter-arguments are
supported by CBL
components
• Some CBL components are
relevant to ideas presented in
• Introduction clearly sets the
stage for the thesis and body
text and present countries to
be investigated
• Thesis is clear and focused
and relates to the introduction
• Thesis conveys the author’s
point of view
• Thesis is at the end of the
introduction
• Each paragraph supports or
rejects the thesis
• Each paragraph is supported
by one or several academic
sources
• Each paragraph focuses on a
single idea (argument or
counter-argument)
• The discussion and support of
that idea are clearly organized
and coherent
• The transitions between each
paragraph are smooth and
logical
• The author provides concrete
examples
• The author answers potential
objections to ideas
• Personal opinions are
supported by academic
sources
• The author clearly analyzes
problems rather than
summarizing them
• Most main arguments or
counter-arguments are
supported by CBL
components
• CBL components are relevant
to ideas presented in
- 69 -
Direct quotes
(5 points max)
Conclusion
(4 points max)
Academic sources
number
(10 points max)
Academic sources
citation format
(12 points max)
in paragraphs
• CBL components are not
integrated in paragraphs but
rather condensed at the end
of the paper or random
• Paper is a succession of
quotes
-10% per quote
• Quotes are not commented
on
• Quotes are not
appropriately cited
• Quotes are not integrated in
the text
• The conclusion does not
parallel the thesis
• The conclusion does not
generate any new thoughts
paragraphs
• Some CLB component are
completely integrated in
paragraphs
• Paper contains too many
quotes
• Some quotes are commented
on
• Quotes are mainly
appropriately cited
• Quotes are somewhat
integrated in the text
• The conclusion somewhat
parallels the thesis
• The conclusion generates
some new thoughts
• -10% per missing source • -10% per missing source • At least 6
• -10% per in-text citation
cited incorrectly
• -10% per citation cited
incorrectly in the
References section
• 10% per in-text citation
cited incorrectly
• -10% per citation cited
incorrectly in the
References section
paragraphs
• CLB component are
completely integrated in
paragraphs
• Quotes are sparse and only
used when absolutely
necessary
• Quotes are commented on
• Quotes are appropriately cited
(refer to instructions on your
specific citation format)
• Quotes are well integrated in
the text
• The conclusion parallels the
thesis
• The conclusion generates new
thoughts
• All in-text citations are
following the chosen citation
format
• All citations in the References
section are following the
chosen citation format
Subtotal Points/100: ----------------------------------
Additional Penalties
The introduction does not address cross-cultural and cross-religious issues related to health: -20% -----------
Paper exceeding the page limit excluding the front page and the References section: -20% -----------
Incorrect spelling, grammar or word choice: -2% each ----------
Did not bring 3 copies: student lose peer-review points ----------
Total Points/100: --------------------------------------
- 70 -
Final Paper (200 points), Bring graded draft and grading grid
The paper will not be accepted if neither 1) word-processed nor 2) stapled nor 3) one-and-a-half spaced nor 4)
written using an 11.5 font size and nor 5) one-sided.
In addition this paper will not be accepted if both graded draft and graded grid are not attached.
Poor/Needs Improvement
(0-75%)
Approaches Expectations
(75-90%)
Meets Expectations
(90-100%)
Body length
• 8 pages (excluding front • 9 pages (excluding front • 10 pages (excluding front page
(3 points max)
page and References
page and References section) and References section)
Paper below 8 pages section)
will receive a -50%
penalty
Front page
(4 points max)
If citation format is not
cited ALL citation
points will be removed
Introduction
(10 points max)
Thesis
(10 points max)
Paragraphing
(50 points max)
Critical thinking
and analysis
(25 points max)
Community-based
research (CBL)
(25 points max)
• Title is short and “catchy”
or unprofessional
• Name is missing
• Introduction fails to set the
stage for thesis and body
text and does not present
countries to be investigated
• Thesis is absent or lacks
clarity and focus
• The thesis does not reflect
the author’s point of view
• Thesis is at the beginning of
the introduction
• The paragraphs do not
support or reject the thesis
• The paragraphs are not
supported by academic
sources
• The paragraphs do not
focus on a single idea
(argument or counterargument)
• The discussion and support
of ideas are not clearly
organized and are
incoherent
• The transitions are abrupt
and illogical
• The author does not provide
concrete example but rather
remains very vague and
general
• The author does not address
potential objections to ideas
• The author fails to analyze
problems and remained
superficial
• Main arguments or counterarguments
are not
supported by CBL
components
• CBL components are
• Title is poorly worded • Title is accurate and reflects
thesis
• Citation format is clear (CSE
or APA)
• Introduction is somewhat
relevant to thesis and body
text and not fully present
countries to be investigated
• Thesis is somewhat clear and
focused
• It is unclear thesis reflects
the author’s point of view
• Thesis appears randomly in
the introduction
• Some paragraphs support or
reject the thesis
• Some paragraphs are
supported by academic
sources
• Some paragraph focus on a
single idea (argument or
counter-argument) while
others do not
• The discussion and support
of ideas are somewhat
clearly organized and
coherent
• Some transitions are abrupt
and illogical
• The author provides some
concrete examples
• The author somewhat
answers potential objections
to ideas
• Some personal opinions are
supported by academic
sources
• The author makes an effort
to analyze problems
• Some main arguments or
counter-arguments are
supported by CBL
components
• Some CBL components are
• Introduction clearly sets the
stage for the thesis and body
text and present countries to
be investigated
• Thesis is clear and focused
and relates to the introduction
• Thesis conveys the author’s
point of view
• Thesis is at the end of the
introduction
• Each paragraph supports or
rejects the thesis
• Each paragraph is supported
by one or several academic
sources
• Each paragraph focuses on a
single idea (argument or
counter-argument)
• The discussion and support of
that idea are clearly organized
and coherent
• The transitions between each
paragraph are smooth and
logical
• The author provides concrete
examples
• The author answers potential
objections to ideas
• Personal opinions are
supported by academic
sources
• The author clearly analyzes
problems rather than
summarizing them
• Most main arguments or
counter-arguments are
supported by CBL
components
• CBL components are relevant
- 71 -
Direct quotes
(5 points max)
Conclusion
(8 points max)
Academic sources
number
(20 points max)
Academic sources
citation format
(20 points max)
Revision
(20 points max)
irrelevant to ideas presented
in paragraphs
• CBL components are not
integrated in paragraphs but
rather condensed at the end
of the paper or random
• Paper is a succession of
quotes
-10% per quote
• Quotes are not commented
on
• Quotes are not
appropriately cited
• Quotes are not integrated in
the text
• The conclusion does not
parallel the thesis
• The conclusion does not
generate any new thoughts
relevant to ideas presented in
paragraphs
• Some CLB component are
completely integrated in
paragraphs
• Paper contains too many
quotes
• Some quotes are commented
on
• Quotes are mainly
appropriately cited
• Quotes are somewhat
integrated in the text
• The conclusion somewhat
parallels the thesis
• The conclusion generates
some new thoughts
to ideas presented in
paragraphs
• CLB component are
completely integrated in
paragraphs
• -10% per missing source • -10% per missing source • At least 10
• -10% per in-text citation
cited incorrectly
• -10% per citation cited
incorrectly in the
References section
• Final paper not
substantially different
(inappropriately) from
drafts
• Few/no comments
addressed
• 10% per in-text citation
cited incorrectly
• -10% per citation cited
incorrectly in the
References section
• Final paper substantially
different (as appropriate)
from draft
• Most substantive comments
addressed
• Quotes are sparse and only
used when absolutely
necessary
• Quotes are commented on
• Quotes are appropriately cited
(refer to instructions on your
specific citation format)
• Quotes are well integrated in
the text
• The conclusion parallels the
thesis
• The conclusion generates new
thoughts
• All in-text citations are
following the chosen citation
format
• All citations in the References
section are following the
chosen citation format
• Final paper substantially
different (as appropriate) from
draft
• All substantive comments
addressed
Subtotal Points/200: --------------------------------
Additional Penalties
Paper exceeding the page limit excluding the front page and the References section: -20% ----------
-
Incorrect spelling, grammar or word choice: -2% each ----------
Total Points/200: --------------------------------------
- 72 -
Peer-reviews of Draft Paper (20 points, 2 x 10 points each)
Peer-review 1: You can also make corrections on the paper you are reviewing
Reviewer Name: ________________________
Paper First Author: _____________________
Body length: Is the length of the paper appropriate?
Front Page: Is the front page present? Is the citation format indicated? Is the title accurate and does it reflect the
thesis? If not, provide a new title for the author.
Introduction: Does the introduction clearly set the stage and provide enough background information for the
thesis? If not, suggest to the author what needs to be addressed.
Does the introduction present and compare countries and health issues to be addressed in cross-cultural and/or
cross-religious manners?
Thesis: Is the thesis clear and focused? Does it relate to the background information provided in the
introduction? Does it address cross-cultural and/or cross-religious health issues? If not, provide a new thesis for
the author in light of the paper’s introduction.
Paragraphing: Do the paragraphs support or reject the thesis? Are the paragraphs supported by academic
sources? Does each paragraph focus on a single idea (argument or counter-argument)? Are the transitions
between paragraphs smooth and logical? If not suggest a different order for the paragraphs.
- 73 -
Critical thinking and analysis: Does the author clearly analyze problems/issues rather than just summarizing
them? Are personal opinions supported by academic sources?
Community-based learning research: Are most main arguments or counter-arguments supported by CBL
components? Are the CBL components relevant to the ideas presented in the paragraphs? Are the CBL
components completely integrated in the paragraphs rather than standing alone? If not suggest where the CBL
components should appear.
Direct quotes: Does the paper contain too many quotes? Does the author make good use of quotes? Are the
quotes commented on?
Conclusion: Does the conclusion parallel the thesis? Does the conclusion contain new thoughts?
Academic sources number: Does the paper contain enough academic sources (at least 5)?
Academic sources citation format: Does the author use an appropriate citation format?
Incorrect spelling, grammar or word choice: Does the author need to proofread his/her paper?
Generally, describe the quality of the writing in this paper. Does the author clearly take a stand on an issue
related to health, healing, illness or health care in the world? Does the author address cultural and religious
contexts? Does the body of the paper clearly relate to the thesis?
- 74 -
Peer-review 2: You can also make corrections on the paper you are reviewing
Reviewer Name: ________________________
Paper First Author: _____________________
Body length: Is the length of the paper appropriate?
Front Page: Is the front page present? Is the citation format indicated? Is the title accurate and does it reflect the
thesis? If not, provide a new title for the author.
Introduction: Does the introduction clearly set the stage and provide enough background information for the
thesis? If not, suggest to the author what needs to be addressed.
Does the introduction present and compare countries and health issues to be addressed in cross-cultural and/or
cross-religious manners?
Thesis: Is the thesis clear and focused? Does it relate to the background information provided in the
introduction? Does it address cross-cultural and/or cross-religious health issues? If not, provide a new thesis for
the author in light of the paper’s introduction.
Paragraphing: Do the paragraphs support or reject the thesis? Are the paragraphs supported by academic
sources? Does each paragraph focus on a single idea (argument or counter-argument)? Are the transitions
between paragraphs smooth and logical? If not suggest a different order for the paragraphs.
- 75 -
Critical thinking and analysis: Does the author clearly analyze problems/issues rather than just summarizing
them? Are personal opinions supported by academic sources?
Community-based learning research: Are most main arguments or counter-arguments supported by CBL
components? Are the CBL components relevant to the ideas presented in the paragraphs? Are the CBL
components completely integrated in the paragraphs rather than standing alone? If not suggest where the CBL
components should appear.
Direct quotes: Does the paper contain too many quotes? Does the author make good use of quotes? Are the
quotes commented on?
Conclusion: Does the conclusion parallel the thesis? Does the conclusion contain new thoughts?
Academic sources number: Does the paper contain enough academic sources (at least 5)?
Academic sources citation format: Does the author use an appropriate citation format?
Incorrect spelling, grammar or word choice: Does the author need to proofread his/her paper?
Generally, describe the quality of the writing in this paper. Does the author clearly take a stand on an issue
related to health, healing, illness or health care in the world? Does the author address cultural and religious
contexts? Does the body of the paper clearly relate to the thesis?
- 76 -
Power Point Paper Presentation (50 points), Bring a paper copy of your presentation
The oral presentation will be a 10-minute talk with 5 minutes for questions. When preparing for you presentation, follow your written
research paper as a general guideline; however, you will have to condense the information, as you will not have enough time and visual
support to present the entire content of your paper. The discussion/questions time that follows your talk will then allow you to develop
certain points.
Front Slide
(2 points max)
Introduction
(4 points max)
Thesis
(4 points max)
Paragraphing
(10 points max)
Critical Thinking
and Analysis
(8 points max)
Community-Based
Learning (CBL)
(4 points max)
Direct Quotes
(2 points max)
Conclusion
(4 points max)
Acknowledgements
(2 points max)
Academic Sources
(2 points max)
Visual Aids
(4 points max)
Speaker Skills
(4 points max)
Questions
(4 points max)
Poor/Needs Improvement
(0-75%)
• Title is short and “catchy”
or unprofessional
• Introduction is not a heading
• The introduction does not
set the stage for the thesis
• Thesis in not a heading
• The thesis is unclear and not
personal
• Statements is not a heading
• Paragraphs do not support
or reject the thesis
• Paragraphs are not
supported by academic
sources - -10% per missing
source
• Transitions are illogical
• The speaker fails to analyze
problems and remains
superficial
• Main ideas are not
supported by CBL research
• CBL is irrelevant to ideas
• CBL is not incorporated
Approaches Expectations
(75-90%)
Meets Expectations
(90-100%)
• Title is poorly worded • Title is accurate and reflects
thesis
• The introduction is somewhat
relevant to the thesis
• The thesis is somewhat clear
and focused
• Some paragraphs support or
reject the thesis
• Some paragraphs are
supported by academic
sources - -10% per missing
source
• Transitions are somewhat
logical
• The speaker makes an effort to
analyze problems
• Some main ideas are
supported by CBL research
• CBL is somewhat relevant
• CBL is rather incorporated
• Word Introduction is a heading
• The introduction is clear and sets
the stage for the thesis
• Word Thesis is a heading
• Thesis is clear and focused
• Author is taking a stand
• Word Statements is a heading
• Each paragraph supports or
rejects the thesis
• Each paragraph is supported by
academic sources - At least 5
• The transitions between
paragraphs are smooth and
logical
• The speaker clearly analyzes
problems rather than just
summarizing them
• Most main ideas are supported
by CBL research
• CBL is relevant to ideas
• CBL is incorporated
• Too many quotes • Some unnecessary quotes • Quote are spare and only used
when necessary
• Conclusion is not a heading
• Conclusion does not parallel
thesis and does not expand
• Acknowledgement is not a
heading
• Speaker fails to
acknowledge appropriate
• References is not a heading
• Academic sources are not
correctly cited
• -10% per missing source
• The visual aids are of poor
quality
• The visual aids fail to
effectively convey ideas
• The speaker is neither
confident nor professional
• The speaker fails to answer
questions
• Conclusion rather parallels the
thesis and brings some new
thoughts
• Speaker acknowledges some
individuals
• Some academic sources are
correctly cited
• -10% per missing source
• The visual aids are of
mediocre quality
• The visual aids somewhat
effectively convey ideas
• The speaker is somewhat
confident and professional
• The speaker answers some
questions
• Word Conclusion is a heading
• The conclusion parallels the
thesis and brings new thoughts
• Word Acknowledgements is a
heading
• Speaker acknowledges
appropriate individuals
• Word References is a heading
• All academic sources used in the
text are correctly cited
• At least 5
• The visual aids are of good
quality
• The visual aids are effective at
conveying ideas
• The speaker is confident (faces
audience, does not read notes, is
audible) and professional
• The speaker correctly answers
all questions
Subtotal Points/50: -----------------
Additional Penalties
Talk is either too long (>12 minutes) or too short (
APPENDIX B: RECEIPTS
The following receipts should be detached prior to your visits. The Reference Librarian and the Writing
Consultant will fill those and then mail them to me.
Visit to the DML library
Name of the course: RCC400D RU04 (Medical Anthropology) – Fall 2011
Name of the Student: -----------------------------
Date: -------------------------------------------------
Raison for visit:
Problems:
Name and signature of the Reference Librarian
Visit to the Writing Center
Name of the course: RCC400D RU04 (Medical Anthropology) – Fall 2011
Name of the Student: -----------------------------
Date: -------------------------------------------------
Raison for visit:
Problems:
Name and signature of the Reference Librarian
- 78 -
APPENDIX If
Genetics Lecture, BL414, Spring 2013
Marie-dominique Franco, Ph. D.
Department of Biology, Science Building #223; Tel: 303-458-4198
mfranco@regis.edu
(This syllabus may be subject to changes throughout the semester)
GENERAL INFORMATION
The lecture sessions meet three times a week on Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays from 10:30 am to 11:30 pm
in Loyola Hall Room #5. My office hours are on Mondays and Wednesdays from 8:00 am to 10:30 am and by
appointments. My academic website is http://academic.regis.edu/mfranco/ where you can find a link to the course
and its material. The Add/Drop deadline is January 22 nd , 2013 and the Withdrawal deadline is March 22 nd , 2013.
Note: All e-mail communications will be sent to your Regis account.
COURSE DESCRIPTION/GOALS
This course explores the concepts of heredity, including the structure, replication, transmission and expression of
genes from the DNA of chromosomes. The course also interprets genetic phenomena at different levels of
organization, including prokaryotic and eukaryotic systems. Also, students will synthesize ideas and data from
multiple sources to communicate information about selected genetic disease through the preparation of an
annotated bibliography and a pamphlet. Students are expected to know the material presented in the Principles of
Biology: Molecular and Cellular Biology lecture and laboratory courses (BL260 and BL261) as these two courses
are pre-requisites to the Genetics lecture and laboratory courses.
STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES
After completion of this course, successful students should be able to:
a. Demonstrate understanding of the basic processes of heredity, from Mendelian to chromosomal, with
emphasis on important experimental organisms and human genetics.
b. Apply knowledge of the molecular basis of information flow from DNA to understand how alterations in
genes or regulation cause disease, how genome sequencing permits detection of genetic disease, and how
model organisms constructed with specific mutations help elucidate the molecular basis of disease.
c. Appreciate the historical context and the major contributors to the modern field of genetics.
d. Investigate the social and ethical implications of genetic advances, including questions of genetic privacy,
of gene therapy, and of genetically-modified organisms.
e. Employ critical thinking and expand communication skills by preparing a pamphlet on a human genetic
disease or genetic trait that translates complex scientific information and data into a format accessible to
an audience with introduction to Biology background.
READING
Weekly assigned reading will include appropriate sections of the textbook, Genetics: Analysis of Genes and
genomes 8 th edition by Hartl, DL., and Ruvolo, M. (2012) Jones & Bartlett Learning, and from the Power Point
lecture notes that will be available to you on the course web site. Please, bring a printed version of the notes in
class for addition of your personal notes. I will provide handouts and papers for specific topics when necessary.
Also, you will need for the pamphlet the Writing Papers in the Biological Sciences, 5 th ed. by V.E. McMillan
(2012). Bedford St. Martin’s (an older edition is OK; you should all own one copy from BL261 and BL263).
HOW TO STUDY FOR THIS COURSE
This course is an in-depth upper division course that requires a lot of work. All topics build on each other and you
- 79 -
need to comprehend the early material in order to follow. In order to succeed in this course you need to:
• Read assigned chapters before lecture sessions
• Come to class with your printed PowerPoint lecture notes
• Ask questions in class if you don’t understand
• Spend a minimum of 3 hours of study time for 1 hour of lecture
• Work in group and quiz yourselves. If you realize you still don’t understand, come to me for explanations
ATTENDANCE
Attendance is required, although you will not be penalized if you miss class on occasional times. Attendance will
be taken at every class period; students who miss two full weeks of lectures (6 periods) for any reason (excused
and unexcused) will have their letter grade reduced by one letter at the end of the semester and students who miss
three full weeks of lectures (9 periods) for any reason (excused and unexcused) will fail the course.
If you must miss either quizzes or exams for athletic competition (NCAA team) or medical or family emergency,
you must notify me and provide an official letter of explanation and an Excused Absence Form (attached at the
end of syllabus) and the missed assignment will be averaged out of the grand total. There is no make-up TBL,
quizzes or exams for excused missed ones; your final grade will be calculated averaging the assignments if you
have an excused absence or you will receive a “0” grade for all unexcused missed assignments. In any case, the
grade will appear as “0” until the official letter of explanation and the Excused Absence Form are turned in. The
final exam cannot be excused, all students need to take it during the official time period; students not taking the
final exam (for any reason) will receive a “0” grade.
DISABILITY
If you have a documented disability requiring academic adjustments for this course, please contact the Disability
Services Office (303-458-4941, disability@regis.edu). The Disability Services office will review your
documentation with you and determine appropriate, reasonable accommodations. Following the meeting with
Disability Services personnel, please make an appointment with me to discuss your accommodation request.
INNAPROPRIATE ACADEMIC CONDUCT
From the Regis University Bulletin: “Our collective academic honesty is a simple prerequisite for the pursuit of
knowledge. In particular, the Jesuit principles that underlie the Regis College mission statement and core
philosophy, with their call to ethical inquiry and care of the whole person, demand students commit to academic
integrity in their pursuit of a Regis College education. Students and faculty are expected to adhere to standards of
good academic conduct: being responsible for one’s own academic work, participating with good faith in
academic discussions, acknowledging the work of others. Regis College takes very seriously violations of
academic integrity, including but not limited to: plagiarism, cheating, duplicate submission of work, collusion,
submitting false information, unauthorized use of computers or other electronic devices (e.g., during an exam),
theft and destruction of property, and unauthorized possession of materials.” In the unlikely event that academic
misconduct occurs, the consequences will be severe.
• A first offense of academic misconduct that the instructor judges to be of lesser severity will minimally
result in a 0% score on the assignment/quiz/exam AND the formal report of the infraction to the Chair of
the Biology Department and the Regis College Dean’s Office.
• Academic misconduct that the instructor judges to be severe, vandalism, or any second offense of
inappropriate academic conduct any type, will result in immediate failure of the course (grade = F) AND
the formal report of the infraction to the Chair of the Biology Department and the Regis College Dean’s
Office (which may result in separate institutional punishment).
In addition, during testing periods, personal calculators will not be permitted, hat brims will need to be turned
backward and, all personal items will be stored in the front of the room. Students will not be able to leave the
classroom during testing periods (of any kind).
Cellular Phones, Text Messaging, Laptops, Tablets, and Other Computerized Devices
- 80 -
In general, these may not be used in class, so turn these off. If you have a special need to use one of these in class,
you must obtain the instructor’s permission. The instructor also may allow a student to use a computerized device
in class as long as it will not distract or impair other students or the instructor. Please give the class your full
attention. Any use of such devices will result in minus 10 points each time from the grand total points.
TBL (Team-Based Learning) Activities
The main purpose of TBL is to change the classroom experience from acquiring course content and concepts in a
lecture‐based format to applying course content and concepts in a team format. In other words, students spend
their classroom time applying course material rather than simply acquiring it. During our TBL activities,
classroom learning will occur in teams of 5 to 7 students. Prior to the TBL activity, students will be study
assigned class material (lecture notes, readings, website tutorials, video demonstrations, etc.).
During the first class session of a TBL unit students take an individual readiness assessment test (iRAT) over the
assigned material. The iRAT will consist of 10 multiple choice questions (1pt/correct answer; 10 pts total). Right
after this individual test, students retake the same test as a team (tRAT), using the immediate feedback assessment
technique (IF-AT). The IF-AT testing system enables students to be provided immediate feedback about the
accuracy of their answers and also allows students to continue answering a question until they discover the correct
answer. Teams that correctly answer the tRAT question on the first try will receive 1 pt (1pt/correct answer on
first try; 10 points total); teams that correctly answer on their second try will receive 0.5 pt, teams that correctly
answer on their third try will receive 0.25 pt, teams unable to correctly answer by the third try will be required to
continue until they answer correctly but will not be awarded any points. Both iRAT and tRAT grades are counted
in terms of final grade calculations. The individual tests hold students accountable for learning the material before
class and the team tests provide an exciting opportunity for students to learn from one another while working
together on the test.
The class following the readiness assessment process (or just after iRAT/tRAT), each team is assigned the same
application exercises to solve. Application exercises are designed such that students use the material they learned
inside and outside of class to solve challenging problems. Each team reveals their answer to the application
exercise simultaneously, resulting in energetic conversation between teams, as each teams seeks to justify their
answer. Teams are held accountable for their work by writing an explanation for their answer to application
exercises which is later graded by the course instructors. Each time block of application exercises is worth a total
of 20 points. Following some application exercise class period students will assess each team member’s
performance in a peer evaluation exercise (10 pts/assessment).
(Modified from TBL: An Alternative to Lecture-Based Learning, School of Pharmacy, Regis University, 2010).
Regis Writing Center
The Writing Center offers Regis College students immediate and personal feedback on their writing and answers
to questions about grammar, documentation, and formatting. Peer writing consultants help at any point in the
writing process, from brainstorming for ideas to organizing a draft to polishing the final version. The Writing
Center is a very popular service, so appointments are strongly recommended. Drop by or call (303) 458-4039 for
more information.
Dayton Memorial Library
Reference librarians provide assistance in locating facts, refining a research strategy, focusing a topic, selecting
the appropriate databases or other resources, or interpreting research results. More in-depth assistance, called a
"Research Consultation," is available by appointment for larger research projects.
GRADES
Turnitin
Turnitin is a Web-based service that can find and highlight matching or unoriginal text in a written assignment. It
uses data-mining to compile a large database of electronic academic materials which it indexes and stores. Faculty
can send their students' assignments to the Turnitin database or else set up to allow students to send their own
- 81 -
assignments to the service for checking. Turnitin basically checks the assignment against its database of materials
to look for matches or near-matches in strings of text. Turnitin then generates an Originality Report online. The
Originality Report summarizes and highlights matching text. For all assignments sent to Turnitin, assignments
may minimally receive a grade of “0” if the percentage of similarity is high (as defined by the instructor);
assignment with higher percentage of similarity may lead to the failure of the course (F grade). The course ID is
5922276 and the password is genetics2013.
Team-Based Learning
There will eight TBLs in the semester, it is imperative that you do not miss these sessions as you are part of a
team.
General Biology Competency Quiz
Students must receive a grade of 72.5% or higher (at least C grade) to be able to continue receiving grades in the
course. Students receiving less than 72.5% at their first attempt will be able to retake the quiz two more times.
The highest grade will be recorded for the grand total.
Exam
There will be a total of four exams that will cover material from the lectures, the textbook, TBL and any other
documents I may give you. All but the first exam are comprehensive. Once the exams are distributed, students
will not be able to leave the room unless an emergency arises. The final exam cannot be averaged out (for any
reason) and students who miss it will receive a grade of “0”.
Annotated Bibliography
This is a formal bibliography that includes citations of sources with summary and evaluation information for each
source. Each student will research the paper topic agreed upon, using multiple academic sources. A minimum of
six sources should be used with at least four coming from primary research articles. The citation format should be
in APA or CSE only. The Assignment will need to be submitted to Turnitin.com by the due date; if not submitted
the assignment will receive a “0” grade.
Disease Pamphlet
Each student will create a disease pamphlet which they will present in Genetics Laboratory course (BL415) on
Thursday May 2 nd and submit to Turnitin.com by April 1 st at 5:00 pm (if not submitted the assignment will
receive a “0” grade). The presentation is worth 50 points (these points will be integrated into the laboratory
grade) and the pamphlet itself is worth a total of 100 points. This assignment is designed to help you:
• Explore the background and causes of a disease or inherited genetic anomaly of particular interest.
• Integrate factual information from the genetic and physiological perspectives.
• Analyze and summarize an area of relevant recent research from the primary (experimental, peerreviewed)
scientific literature.
• Communicate your deep understanding of the disease to an educated but not expert audience. Imagine
presenting your knowledge on the disease in an introductory level collegiate biology course.
All pamphlets will be entered into a class competition; the 5 best pamphlets will receive 50 points of Bonus
Points and will need to be presented using a poster format on Monday April 22 nd from 5:00 to 6:00 pm at the
Poster Session of the Department of Biology Spring 2013 Seminar Series.
Possible Grading Inaccuracies
If you think that something was mistakenly graded as incorrect, please notify your instructor. Wait at least one
day and resubmit the test or assignment to your instructor with a brief written explanation of why you think the
grading was in error. No grading re-consideration requests for assignments (other than the final exam) will be
accepted after the final exam.
Your final course grade will be assigned based on the percentage of points earned out of a total of 1115 points. In
addition, I may occasionally give pop quizzes. All the testing sessions are scheduled at the beginning of the
semester; therefore you need to make sure you will be on campus these days. There will be no make-up
- 82 -
assignments or exams; any missed assignments or exam will result in a “0” for this particular test. If you must
miss an assignment or exam for either athletic competition or medical emergency or family emergency, you must
provide an official letter of explanation and Excused Absence Form within a week of the scheduled assignment.
Competency quiz
25 points
Exam I
100 points
Grading Scale
Comprehensive Exam II 130 points
A 100-92.5 % C .4-72.5 %
A
Comprehensive Exam III 150 points
- 92.4-89.5 % C - 72.4-69.5 %
B+ 89.4-85.5 % D+ 69.4-65.5 %
Comprehensive Final Exam 200 points
Annotated Bibliography 50 points
B 85.4-82.5 % D 65.4-62.5 %
Disease pamphlet
100 points
B - 82.4-79.5 % D - 62.4-59.5 %
C+ .4-75.5 % F
ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY (50 POINTS)
This is a formal bibliography that includes citations of sources with summary and evaluation information for each
source. Each student will research the pamphlet topic agreed upon, using multiple academic sources. A
minimum of six sources should be used with at least four coming from primary research articles and two from
review articles. The citation format should be in APA or CSE formats only. The emphasis is on finding
accurate, reliable sources and providing a clear summary and evaluation for each source. Both the Writing Center
and the DML can help you with references. Use of Wikipedia or any such popular site will result in a “0” grade
for the assignment.
Mention your citation format (APA or CSE) on top of the page; otherwise the assignment will not be graded.
Meets Expectations Approaches Expectations Needs Major Improvement
Poor
(90-100%)
(75-90%)
(50-75%)
(0-50%)
Content
(13 points)
Relative
Importance to
Subject
(13 points)
Annotation:
Includes all 6
points. See
explanation on
the following
pages
(12 points)
Conventions:
Proofreading,
Spelling,
Grammar,
APA Style
(12 points)
Academic
sources number
Your sources are
interesting and
they are all clearly
related to your
topic.
You select a
variety of
academic sources
that are all written
at the appropriate
level for this
paper’s purpose.
The connection
between your
sources and your
topic are clear.
Your annotation
follows the 6
points and
provides the main
conclusions of
each source.
You correctly cite
at least 6 sources
using either APA
or CSE style.
-10% per missing
source
Your sources are
interesting and most
are clearly related to
your topic.
You select a variety of
academic sources and
most are written at the
appropriate level for
this paper’s purpose.
In most cases the
connection between
your source and the
topic is clear.
You clearly
summarize the main
conclusions of each of
your sources and
include most of the 6
points for annotations.
You cite at least 6
sources using either
APA or CSE style but
there are a few errors.
Your sources cover your
topic, but they are less
interesting and the
relationship to your paper is
less clear.
The sources you selected
are less varied, but most are
written at the appropriate
level for this project’s
purpose. At times the
connection between the
sources and your topic is
unclear.
You clearly summarize the
main conclusion of each of
your sources, but fail to
include most of the
annotation points.
You cite at least 6 sources
and try to use either APA or
CSE style, but have some
difficulty.
Few, if any, of your
sources are related
to your topic. You
seem to have no real
interest in your
paper.
You select mostly
one source type (i.e.,
books). Often the
connection is
unclear if there is
one at all.
You try to
summarize your
sources, but have
trouble focusing on
the main idea. You
make little or no
attempt to include
all 6 points for
annotations.
You cite at least 6
using your own
citation style or use
either APA or CSE
style but there are
many errors.
-10% per missing source -10% per missing source -10% per missing source
Subtotal Points/50: -----------
Additional Penalties
Presence of direct quote: -20% each -----------
Total Points/50: -----------
- 84 -
- 85 -
DISEASE PAMPHLET (100 POINTS) (The pamphlet needs to be double-sided, color printed and dropped by
my office before the due date, otherwise it will not be graded, also the pamphlet needs to be submitted to
Turnitin.com, otherwise it will not be graded.
Instructions
This assignment is designed to help you:
• Explore the background and causes of a disease or inherited genetic anomaly of particular
interest.
• Analyze and summarize an area of relevant recent research from at least seven primary
(experimental, peer-reviewed) scientific literature with the exception of at least three review
papers.
• Communicate your deep understanding of the disease to an educated but not expert audience as
you would to an introductory level course in Biology (not the general public).
Your pamphlet should follow this Language and Readability requirements:
• Must be clear and concise. Avoid wordiness and redundancy. See grammar handbook for examples.
• Must be grammatically correct. Use correct punctuation and spelling. Avoid run-on or incomplete
sentences.
• The active voice is preferred to the passive voice: “Smith (2006) found that dogs like treats” is preferred
to “In the experiments of Smith (2006), it was found that…”
• Must use words correctly. Be careful with words like “amount/number”, “affect/effect” and scientific
terms.
• No quotes are needed or permitted in short papers such as these. Restate complex sentences and phrases
in your own words and cite the author; be careful to avoid plagiarism.
• All species names need to be correctly spelled and italicized.
Your pamphlet should follow this General Format:
The pamphlet should demonstrate your ability to synergize the knowledge and facts you acquired preparing the
bibliography and your ability to communicate information. As your model, take a look at pamphlets at a doctor’s
or dentist’s office or clinic. Creativity in presentation and format is acceptable and encouraged. The pamphlet
will start with a clear, descriptive title and your name will be included in a header at the top of the page. The
pamphlet may contain no more than two photos (2x2 with reference and clear explanation of what the photo
demonstrates) and the overall format may be:
• Tri-fold pamphlets (encouraged)
• Bi-fold pamphlets
• Standard format newsletter style documents
In addition the pamphlet should be three complete pages (two pages for the pamphlet and one page for the
references) using a 1) single-spaced, 2) 11 point font (Times New Roman or other standard font), 3) 0.5 inch
margins (not the default setting), 4) an indent, rather than a line space between paragraphs and 5) justified left.
Your pamphlet should contain the following headings and subheadings to show a good Organization:
Utilize major section headings (bold or underlined) to clearly indicate organizational sections and the subheadings
should also be identifiable for the general text.
Background and History of the Disease
General Introduction
This section introduces the general topic by describing the gene, enzyme, cellular defect and
inheritance pattern (e.g. chromosome deletion, recessive or dominant, sex-lined or autosomal,
sporadic, etc…) and general symptoms. Also, this section gives basic statistics such as incidence,
carrier percentage and also mentions the major areas of recent research.
- 86 -
Then this section adds more details about the molecular basis of the disease and the connections
between errors at the gene level and the phenotype of the person. For some diseases, there may be
many different types of mutations to explain.
History
This section briefly retraces the history of the trait/disease with: its discovery or discoverers, current
estimates of the incidence in the U.S. and/or worldwide, the types of diagnostic tests available
(enzymes, PCR, etc…).
Pathology and Molecular Basis
This section describes the disease pathology or the clinical consequences of the trait/disease. It
includes connections from the molecular and cellular angles to what we understand for the whole
organism. This section may also ask the following questions: Do people with this disease have a
shortened life expectancy? Can they have children? What types of clinical problems do they have?
Screening and Treatment
This section gives an overview of current treatment and screening and the possibility of cure or
increasing life expectancy. This section may also ask the following questions: Are there any social or
ethical concerns about these treatments, diagnosis or screening methods?
Review of Current Research and Clinical Trails
Current Research
This section summarizes and compares current primary research papers that report research on this
trait/disease and that have been published in peer-reviewed journals over the last few years.
Depending on your topic, these articles should probably be from 2008 to the present. You should
choose a particular theme from the current research and draw together a set of findings that you will
summarize, compare and synthesize. For example, depending on your own interests and the available
current research, you may focus on basic research to understand the molecular aspects of the disease,
focusing on treatment and/or screening
Clinical Trials
This section should tell the reader where trends are heading.
Conclusion
This section should give one or two concluding remarks on the current status of the disease and treatment options.
Your pamphlet should follow basic scientific References rules:
Most of the references in your pamphlet should come from your Annotated Bibliography (at least four primary
research articles and two review articles). The References section page should be paper-clipped to the pamphlet
when you drop your printed version by my office. All references should be cited in the text using the Name-Year
(CSE or APA) format.
- 87 -
Rubric for the Disease Pamphlet (100 points)
Name:
Citation format
(Penalty points
only)
Language and
Readability
(7 points)
Pamphlet Format
(7 points)
Organization
(7 points)
Reference Page
(14 points)
Poor/Needs Improvement
(0-75%)
The citation format (APA or CSE) is
not mentioned below name.
50% penalty
-Jumbled language, disconnected, no
clear direction.
-Redundant and/or overly wordy.
-Major or multiple grammatical errors,
poor punctuation, run-on or
incomplete sentences, misspellings.
-Passive voice used extensively, word
misuse.
-Quotes are used.
(0-5.25 points)
-Pamphlet is less than 2 complete,
double sided print pages.
-not single spaced, 11 point legible
font or 0.5” margins.
-Too many photos of the wrong size,
exceptions not approved, or irrelevant
photos.
-Too much spacing between
paragraphs.
-Title missing or unclear, name of
student missing.
-References not cited.
(0-5.25 points)
-Poorly organized, no clear section
heading or subheading.
-Major section headings are not used
appropriately.
-Sloppy presentation.
-Paragraphs lack topic sentences, good
flow and do not connect the
information presented to the reader.
(0-5.25 points)
-Not in alphabetical order.
- Not according to CSE or APA style
type.
- Missing multiple data points.
-Punctuation is dramatically off
standard
-Inconsistent.
-Multiple spelling and grammatical
errors.
(0-10.50 points)
Approaches expectations
(75-90%)
The citation format (APA or CSE)
is not mentioned below name.
50% penalty
-Generally readable, but minor
distractions and inconsistencies.
-Some minor areas of wordiness or
redundancy.
-Minor mistakes in grammar,
spelling or punctuation.
-Some usage of passive voice and
one or two word misusages.
(5.25-6.30 points)
-Pamphlet is 3 pages, but not
complete pages or double sided
-Margins, font and spacing are
close, but not as expected.
-Photos are not quite the right size
or not perfectly relevant.
-Name present.
-Title poorly worded or
abbreviated
-References cited, but not in
proper format.
(5.25-6.30 points)
-One section heading or
subheading is missing: Disease
History and Background,
Screening and Treatment, Current
research and etc …
-Section headings and subheadings
are used but unclear.
-Neatly presented but not in
logical order
-Some paragraphs have topic
sentences. There is a moderate
flow and the text somewhat
connects the information presented
to the reader.
(5.25-6.30 points)
-Minor deviations from CSE or
APA style type.
-Missing one data point.
-Punctuation is generally on
standard.
-Generally consistent
-One or two spelling and
grammatical errors
(10.50-12.60 points)
Meets Expectations
(90-100%)
The citation format (APA or
CSE) is mentioned below name.
-Fluidly written, completely
consistent in style, no
distractions
-No wordiness or redundancy
-No errors in grammar, spelling
or punctuation.
-No usage of passive voice or
word problems.
-No quotes are used.
(6.30-7.00 points)
-Pamphlet is 3 full pages, double
sided (2 pages pamphlet and one
page References).
-Margins are 0.5”, font is clear
and 11 point, paragraph spacing
is correct.
-Photos are absolutely relevant
and correct size (2x2).
-Name is present.
-Title lists disease or anomaly
completely, is descriptive and
clear.
-References cited in name/year
format.
(6.30-7.00 points)
-All section headings and
subheadings are present.
-All are presented in a clear
order.
-Paragraphs have distinct topic
sentences, good flow and
connect the information
presented to the reader.
(6.30-7.00 points)
-Complete adherence to style
type.
-Completely consistent.
-No punctuation, grammatical or
spelling errors
(12.60–14.00points)
- 88 -
References
Number
(Penalty points
only)
Background and
History
(40 points)
Review of Current
Research and
Clinical Trials
(20 points)
Conclusion
(5 points)
For each missing article, 20% of the
points will be removed.
-No or few headings or subheading
present.
Demonstrates little understanding of
subject.
-Does not at all describe the gene,
enzyme, cellular defect and
inheritance pattern.
-No detail present about the molecular
basis of the disease and the
connections between errors at the gene
level and the phenotype of the person.
-No history of the trait/disease.
-Does not describe the pathology or
the clinical consequences.
-No symptoms or problems listed.
-No overview of treatment, screening
and prognosis possibilities or ethical
concerns.
(0-30.00 points)
-No or few subheading present
-Demonstrates little understanding of
subject
-No theme selected, or theme is off
base.
-No connection to other information
presented.
-Articles selected do not reflect a fit
into student’s topic
-Articles selected are not primary
research papers, or they are older than
2008.
(0-15.00 points)
-The conclusion does not summarize
medical progress toward finding a
cure and does not relate to the general
introduction.
(0-3.75 points)
For each missing article, 20% of
the points will be removed.
-Some headings and subheadings
present.
-Demonstrates general
understanding of subject.
-Somewhat describes the gene,
enzyme, cellular defect and
inheritance pattern.
-Some detail present about the
molecular basis of the disease and
the connections between errors at
the gene level and the phenotype
of the person.
-Brief history of the trait/disease.
-Somewhat limited description of
the pathology or the clinical
consequences.
-Limited symptoms or problems
listed.
-Some, but not comprehensive
overview of treatment, screening
and prognosis possibilities or
ethical concerns.
At least 7 peer-reviewed primary
research articles and 3 peerreviewed
review articles.
-At least a total of 10 peerreviewed
articles.
-All headings and subheadings
are present 9see instruction
above).
-Demonstrates a comprehensive
understanding of subject
-Describes well the chromosome,
gene, enzyme, cellular defect and
inheritance pattern.
-Good detail present about the
molecular basis of the disease
and the connections between
errors at the gene level and the
phenotype of the person.
-Well summarized brief history
of the trait/disease.
-Describes the pathology and the
clinical consequences.
-Comprehensive symptoms and
problems listed.
-Excellent overview of treatment,
screening and prognosis
possibilities, explains ethical
concerns well.
(30.00-36.00 points)
(36.00-40.00 points)
-Some subheading present. -All subheadings are present (see
-Some minor logic gaps in instruction above).
understanding of subject.
-Demonstrates comprehensive
-Theme selected is generally on understanding of subject.
topic.
-Theme selected is clear and on
-Basic connection to other topic.
information presented.
-Clear connection to other
-Articles selected reflect a general information presented.
fit into student’s topic
-Articles selected reflect a good
-Most articles selected are primary fit into student’s topic
research papers and are newer than -All articles selected are primary
2008.
research papers and are newer
than 2008.
(15.00–18.00 points)
(18.00-20.00 points)
-The conclusion somewhat -The conclusion concisely
summarizes medical progress summarizes medical progress
toward finding a cure and
toward finding a cure and relates
somewhat relates to the general to the general introduction.
introduction.
(3.75-4.50 points)
(4.50-5.00 points)
Subtotal Points/100: __________
Additional Penalties
The citation format is not mentioned below name: 50% ---------
Each quote will be penalized I addition to the loss of points in the rubric: 10% each ---------
Missing academic reference (primary of review): 20% each ---------
Pamphlet not printed: “0”
grade
Pamphlet not submitted to Turnitin: “0”
grade
Final Total Points/100: ____________
- 89 -
SUGGESTED DISEASES and GENERAL CATEGORIES (Other diseases must first be cleared by me)
Autosomal recessive:
Familial hypertrophic cardiomyopathy
Tay Sach's
Friedreich ataxia
Xeroderma pigmentosum
B-thalassemia (anemia)
Albinism
Double-muscled (myostatin)
Myotonic dystrophy
Nieuman-Pick Disease A, B or C
Deafness
Gaucher disease
Autosomal dominant:
Familial hypercholesterolemia (FH, receptor form) Marfan syndrome
Machado-Joseph disease
Neurofibromatosis
Achondroplasia (dwarfism)
ALS amyotrophic lateral sclerosis
Amelogenesis imperfecta (teeth enamel) Polycystic kidney disease
X-linked recessive:
Duchenne muscular dystrophy
Icthyosis
Lesch-Nyan syndrome
Fabray disease
Color blindness
Agammaglobulinemia
X-SCID (severe combined immune deficiency)
X-linked dominant:
Hypophosphetemia (vitD-resistant rickets) Rett syndrome
CGH (congenital hypertrichosis)
Y gene mutations:
SRY (determines sex)
AZF (azoospermia factor)
Chromosomal:
Down's syndrome (trisomy 21)
Cri du chat
XXY syndrome (Kleinfelter’s)
Burkitt’s lymphoma
Promyelocytic leukemia
XO syndrome (Turner’s)
Imprinting:
Prader-Willi syndrome
Angelman syndrome
Mitochondrial:
LHON (Leber’s heredity optic neuropathy) MELAS (mitochondrial myopathy)
Inherited cancer syndromes and others
Familial melanoma (p16)
Progeria
BRCA1 breast cancer familial
Retinoblastoma
FOP (fibro dysplasia ossificans progressiva) HNPCC – hereditary colon cancer
Bcr/Abl leukemia (Philadelphia chromosome) Alzheimers (APP)
PALB2 (binds BRCA2)
Ataxia-telangiectasia (ATM)
Gliobastoma multiforme (GBM and IDH1 gene)
DO NOT CHOOSE (because your text covers them in detail, and we will study these in lectures)
Autosomal recessive: Cystic fibrosis, sickle cell anemia and phenylketonuria
Autosomal dominant: Huntington's
Mitochondrial: MERFF
X-linked: Fragile X syndrome, hemophilia A
Familial cancer: Li-Fraumeni
- 90 -
SEMESTER SCHEDULE (This schedule may be subject to changes throughout the semester)
DATE TOPIC READING/ASSIGNMENT
1- Mon. Jan 14 Introduction to the course, TBL Teams Assignment and General Biology Competency Quiz
1- Wed. Jan. 16 Gene, Genomes and Genetic Analysis Ch. 1
1- Fri. Jan. 18 Gene, Genomes and Genetic Analysis Ch. 1
2- Mon. Jan 21 Martin Luther King Day: No Class
2- Wed. Jan 23 TBL 1
2- Fri. Jan. 25 DNA Structure and Genetic Variation Ch. 2
3- Mon. Jan. 28 DNA Structure and Genetic Variation Ch. 2
3- Wed. Jan. 30 TBL 2 (peer-evaluation 1)
3- Fri. Feb. 1 Transmission Genetic: The Principles of Segregation Ch. 3
4- Mon. Feb. 4 Chromosomes and Sex-Chromosomes Inheritance Ch. 4
4- Wed. Feb. 6 TBL 3
4- Fri. Feb. 8 Exam I
5- Mon. Feb. 11 Genetic Linkage and Chromosome Mapping Ch. 5
5- Wed. Feb. 13 Genetic Linkage and Chromosome Mapping Ch. 5
5- Fri. Feb. 15 Mol. Bio. of DNA Replication and Recombination Ch. 6
6- Mon. Feb. 18 Mol. Bio. of DNA Replication and Recombination Ch. 6 and Disease selection due
6- Wed. Feb. 20 TBL 4 (peer-evaluation 2)
6- Fri. Feb. 22 Molecular Organization of Chromosomes Ch. 7
7- Mon. Feb. 25 Human Karyotypes and Chromosomes Behavior Ch. 8
7- Wed. Mar. 27 Human Karyotypes and Chromosomes Behavior Ch. 8
7- Fri. Mar. 1 TBL 5 (TBL Conference, CA)
8- Mon. Mar. 11 Review for Exam II based on Students’ Questions Bibliography to Turnitin only by 10:30 am
8- Wed. Mar. 13 Exam II
8- Fri. Mar. 15 Molecular Biology of Gene Expression Ch. 10
9- Mon. Mar. 18 Molecular Mechanisms of gene Regulation Ch. 11
9- Wed. Mar. 20 Molecular Mechanisms of gene Regulation Ch. 11
9- Fri. Mar. 22 TBL 6 (peer-evaluation 3)
10- Mon. Mar. 25 Genomics, Proteomics and Transgenics Ch. 12
10- Wed. Mar. 27 Genomics, Proteomics and Transgenics Ch. 12
10- Fri. Mar. 29 Easter Break: No Class
11- Mon. Apr. 1 TBL 7
11- Wed. Apr. 3 Genetic Control of Development Ch. 13
11- Fri. Apr. 5 Review for Exam III based on Students’ Questions
12- Mon. Apr. 8 Exam III
12- Wed. Apr. 10 Mol. Mechanisms of Mutations and DNA Repair Ch. 14
12- Fri. Apr. 12 Mol. Mechanisms of Mutations and DNA Repair Ch. 14
13- Mon. Apr. 15 Molecular Genetics of the Cell Cycle and Cancer Ch. 15
13- Wed. Apr. 17 Molecular Genetics of the Cell Cycle and Cancer Ch. 15
13- Fri. Apr. 19 TBL 8 (peer-evaluation 4)
14- Mon. Apr. 22 Mitochondrial DNA and Extranuclear Inheritance Ch. 16
14- Wed. Apr. 24 Population Genetics Ch. 17
14- Fri. Apr. 26 The Genetic Basis of Complex Inheritance Ch. 18
Friday May 3 8:00 to 10:00 am Final Exam
Disease pamphlet due (Color Printed &
Turnitin by 5:00 pm)
- 91 -
BL 414 EXCUSED ABSENCE FORM
Name __________________
date of absence___________________
This form must be filled out to request an absence from class not be counted. A photocopy of
documentation of the absence, such as a note from a health care provider or a photocopy of a funeral
card/program must be stapled to this form for it to be accepted. The instructor reserves the right to
follow up with the Office of Student Life or other sources to verify excused absences.
If this form is not received, the missed assignment will be graded as a 0%.
This form is for the following class period/ assignment: (indicate below):
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
This excused absence if for the following reason (circle one):
Illness NCAA game/forensic Serious injury of close relative or friend
competition
Serious injury Death or close relative or friend Other
Include Brief explanation of the reason for the excused absence below:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
I the undersigned certify that this was an excused absence of the nature indicated above and request that
the indicated assignment be treated as resulting from an excused absence.
Signature:________________________
date: __________________
- 92 -
APPENDIX Ig
Regis College, Department of Biology
Biomedical Genetics Lecture (BL 614)
Fall 2012 (This syllabus may be subject to changes throughout the
semester)
Marie-dominique Franco, Ph. D. (mfranco@regis.edu)
Office hours are on Mondays from 8:00 to 10:00 am, on Wednesdays
from 8:00 to 9:30 am, on Fridays from 8:00 to 9:30 am, and by
appointments in my office: Pomponio Science Center #223.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Meeting Time
Lecture periods meet three times a week on Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays from 1:30 am to 2:20
pm in Claver Hall, room 204 unless specified otherwise such as for integrative TBL.
General Information
My academic website is http://academic.regis.edu/mfranco/ where you can find a link to the course and
its material. Note: All e-mail communications will be sent to your Regis account.
Lecture Materials
Weekly assigned readings will include appropriate sections from the textbook:
• Thompson &Thompson: Genetics in Medicine 7 th Ed. by Nussbaum, McInnes, and Willard (2007),
Ed. Saunders Elsevier (see schedule for assigned page chapters).
• Specific peer-reviewed articles will be distributed or posted on line for printing throughout the
semester.
Course Description and Objectives
This course will develop student knowledge of molecular genetics and human genetics and will
introduce biomedical ethical controversies with roots in genetics and molecular biology.
Student Learning Outcomes
Students should be able to:
• Know: Recall and correctly explain the terms used in molecular and human genetics.
• Comprehend: Explain and apply the major concepts of molecular and human genetics including
patterns of inheritance, gene expression, replication, and patterns of disease causation.
• Apply: Analyze genetic data to diagnose genetic disorders or determine the likelihood of
inheritance of particular genetic disorders.
• Analyze: Recognize and decide on their own position concerning ethical controversies with roots
in genetics and molecular biology. Apply critical thinking in primary papers reading.
TBL (Team-Based Learning) Activities
The main purpose of TBL is to change the classroom experience from acquiring course content and
concepts in a lecture‐based format to applying course content and concepts in a team format. In other
words, students spend their classroom time applying course material rather than simply acquiring it.
- 93 -
During our TBL activities, classroom learning will occur in teams of 5 students. Prior to the TBL
activity, students will be study assigned class material (lectures, textbook chapters, scientific research
papers, website tutorials, video demonstrations, etc.).
During the first class session of a TBL unit, students take an individual readiness assessment test (iRAT)
over the assigned material. The iRAT will consist of 10 multiple choice questions (2pts/correct answer;
20 pts total). Right after this individual test, students retake the same test as a team (tRAT), using the
immediate feedback assessment technique (IF-AT). The IF-AT testing system enables students to be
provided immediate feedback about the accuracy of their answers and also allows students to continue
answering a question until they discover the correct answer. Teams that correctly answer the tRAT
question on the first try will receive 3 pts (3pts/correct answer on first try; 30 points total); teams that
correctly answer on their second try will receive 2 pts, teams that correctly answer on their third try will
receive 1 pt, teams unable to correctly answer by the third try will be required to continue until they
answer correctly but will not be awarded any points. Both iRAT and tRAT grades are counted in terms
of final grade calculations. The individual tests hold students accountable for learning the material
before class and the team tests provide an exciting opportunity for students to learn from one another
while working together on the test.
The class following the readiness assessment process, each team is assigned the same application
exercises to solve. The application exercises will integrate information from the readiness assessment
quizzes in BL 614, BL 616 and BL 618 courses, BL 613A (when applicable). And contents from prestudied
research articles in a combined 3-hour time block. Application exercises are designed such that
students use the material they learned inside and outside of class to solve challenging problems. Each
team reveals their answer to the application exercise simultaneously, resulting in energetic conversation
between teams, as each teams seeks to justify their answer. Teams are held accountable for their work
by writing an explanation for their answer to application exercises which is later graded by the course
instructors. Each 3-hour time block of application exercises is worth a total of 50 points (the same
points will be distributed in each of the three classes). Following the application exercise class period
students will assess each team member’s performance in a peer evaluation exercise (10 pts/assessment).
Standard Course Policies
Refer to the Student Handbook for the M.S. in Biomedical Sciences Standard Course Policies from page
18 to page 21. Course-specific policies are given in the following paragraphs.
Specific Course Policies
For excused absences, you must provide an official letter of explanation and an Excused Absence Form
(attached at the end of syllabus) within a week of the missed class; failure will result in a “0” grade.
Professionalism is expected and you will start the semester with 45 points from which point deduction
will occur (5 points per infraction such as wearing inappropriate attire in class).
Points Distribution
Your final course grade will be assigned based on the percentage of points earned out of a total of 1200
points. In addition, I may occasionally give pop quizzes worth varying points. All assignments are
scheduled at the beginning of the semester; therefore you need to make sure you will be on campus on
these days; there will be no make-up assignments. Therefore and for all excused absences; your final
- 94 -
grade will be calculating averaging assignments you completed. For all unexcused absences, any missed
assignments will result in a “zero” grade. All exams are comprehensive.
iRAT
tRAT
Application exercises
Peer-evaluation scores
Exam I
Exam II
Exam III
Final exam
Assessment quiz
Professionalism
Exercises
80 (20 x 4) points (each 10 questions at 2 points per question)
120 (30 x 4) points (each 10 questions at 3 points per question)
200 (50 x 4) points
40 (10 x 4) points
100 points
125 points
150 points
200 points
20 points
45 points
120 (20 x 6) points
------------
1200 points
- 95 -
WEEK TOPIC READING
1- M Aug. 27 Introduction / Assessment / The Human Genome and Chromosomal Basis of Heredity I Chap.2
1- W Aug. 29 The Human Genome and Chromosomal Basis of Heredity II Chap.2
1- F Aug. 31 The Human Genome: Gene Structure and Function I Chap.3
2- M Sept. 03 No class: Labor Day
2- W Sept. 05 The Human Genome: Gene Structure and Function II Chap3
2- F Sept. 07 Tools of Human Molecular Genetics I Chap.4
3- M Sept. 10 Tools of Human Molecular Genetics II Chap.4
3- W Sept. 12 Exercises 1 on Tools of Human Molecular Genetics
3- F Sept. 14 Exam I
4- M Sept. 17 Specific TBL1 individual- and team- Readiness Assessment Test (iRAT/tRAT)*
4- W Sept.19 Clinical Cytogenetics I Chaps.5 and 6
4- F Sept. 21
Integrative TBL1 Application (Genetics-Biochemistry-Physiology)
(Thalassemia major, Cystic fibrosis and mitotic non-disjunction colon cancer)
5- M Sept. 24 Clinical Cytogenetics II Chaps.5 and 6
5- W Sept. 26 Clinical Cytogenetics III Chaps.5 and 6
5- F Sept. 28 Exercises 2 on Clinical Cytogenetics
6- M Oct. 01 Patterns of Single-Gene Inheritance I Chap.7
6- W Oct. 03 Patterns of Single-Gene Inheritance II Chap.7
6- F Oct. 05 No class: Fall Faculty Conference
7- M Oct. 08 Specific TBL2 individual- and team- Readiness Assessment Test (iRAT/tRAT)*
7- W Oct. 10 Exercises 3 on Patterns of Single-Gene Inheritance
7- F Oct. 12
Integrative TBL2 Application (Genetics-Biochemistry-Physiology)
(Tay Sach’s, Huntington’s disease and LHON disease)
8- M Oct. 15 No Class: Fall Break
8- W. Oct. 17 Exam II
8- F Oct. 19 Genetics of Common Disorders with Complex Inheritance I Chap.8
9- M Oct. 22 Genetics of Common Disorders with Complex Inheritance II Chap.8
9- W. Oct. 24 Exercises 4 on Common Disorders with Complex Inheritance
9- F Oct. 26 Genetic variation in Individuals and Populations: Mutation and Polymorphism I Chap.9
10- M Oct. 29 Genetic variation in Individuals and Populations: Mutation and Polymorphism II Chap.9
10- W Oct. 31 Human Gene Mapping and Disease Gene Identification I Chap.10
10- F Nov. 02 Human Gene Mapping and Disease Gene Identification II Chap.10
11- M Nov. 05 Specific TBL3 individual- and team- Readiness Assessment Test (iRAT/tRAT)*
11- W Nov. 07 Exercises 5 on Genetic Variation (Chap.9) and Human Gene Mapping (Chap.10)
11- F Nov. 09
Integrative TBL3 Application (Genetics-Biochemistry-Physiology)
(Achondroplasia, Diabetes Type 1, Familial hypercholesterolemia and congenital heart defect)
12- M Nov. 12 Basis of Genetic Diseases and The Treatment of Genetic Diseases I Chaps.11, 12 and 13
12- W Nov. 14 Basis of Genetic Diseases and The Treatment of Genetic Diseases II Chaps.11, 12 and 13
12- F Nov. 16 Exercises 6 on Basis of Genetic Diseases and The Treatment of Genetic Diseases
13-M Nov. 19 Developmental Genetics, Birth Defects and Prenatal Diagnosis Chaps.14 and 15
13- W Nov. 23 No Class: Thanksgiving Break
13- F Nov. 25 No Class: Thanksgiving Break
14- M Nov. 26 Exam III
14- W Nov. 28 Cancer Genetics and Genomics Chap.16
14- F Nov. 30 Personalized Genetic Medicine and Pharmacogenetics/Pharmacogenomics Chaps. 17 and 18
15- M Dec. 03 Specific TBL4 individual- and team- Readiness Assessment Test (iRAT/tRAT)*
15- W Dec. 05 Genetic Counseling, Risk Assessment and Ethical Issues
15- F Dec. 07
M Dec. 10
Chaps.19 and 20
Henrietta Lacks book
Integrative TBL4 Application (Genetics-Biochemistry-Physiology)
(Androgen-insensitivity, Klinefelter regular and mosaic and Breast cancer susceptibility BRCA1/BRCA2)
Final Exam with Graded Assessment Quiz at 10:10 am (2 hours)
- 96 -
BL 614 EXCUSED ABSENCE FORM
Name __________________
date of absence___________________
This form must be filled out to request an absence from class not be counted. A photocopy of
documentation of the absence, such as a note from a health care provider or a photocopy of a funeral
card/program must be stapled to this form for it to be accepted. The instructor reserves the right to
follow up with the Office of Student Life or other sources to verify excused absences.
If this form is not received, the missed assignment will be graded as a 0%.
This form is for the following class period/ assignment: (indicate below):
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------
This excused absence if for the following reason (circle one):
Illness NCAA game/forensic Serious injury of close relative or friend
competition
Serious injury Death or close relative or friend Other
Include Brief explanation of the reason for the excused absence below:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------
I the undersigned certify that this was an excused absence of the nature indicated above and request that
the indicated assignment be treated as resulting from an excused absence.
Signature:________________________
date: __________________
- 97 -
APPENDIX II
- 98 -
- 99 -
APPENDIX III
- 100 -
- 101 -
- 102 -
- 103 -
- 104 -
- 105 -
- 106 -
- 107 -
- 108 -
- 109 -
- 110 -
- 111 -
- 112 -
- 113 -
- 114 -
- 115 -
- 116 -
- 117 -
- 118 -
- 119 -
- 120 -
- 121 -
- 122 -
- 123 -
- 124 -
- 125 -
- 126 -
- 127 -
- 128 -
- 129 -
- 130 -
- 131 -
- 132 -
- 133 -
- 134 -
- 135 -
- 136 -
- 137 -
APPENDIX IV
Courses Outcomes Assessments for BL260, BL261, and BL261H (Principles of
Biology: Molecular and Cellular Biology lecture and laboratory courses)
Spring 2009, Marie-dominique Franco
Principles of Biology: Molecular and Cellular Biology lecture course (BL260, RU01 and
RU02 sections)
Course Goals (as written in the syllabus):
This course introduces students to Natural Science; particularly the hypothesis testing and data analysis
used in contemporary Molecular and Cellular Biology. In addition, this course develops student
knowledge of the terms and concepts of Cell Biology, Genetics, and Molecular Biology, and will also
highlight social and ethical issues.
Learning Outcomes (as written in the syllabus):
a. Generally explain how science differs from other ways of knowing
b. Define the major terms used in Cell Biology, Genetics, and Molecular Biology
c. Explain the major organizing concepts in Cell Biology, Genetics, and Molecular Biology
d. Recognize the social and ethical relevance of content covered in Genetics and Biotechnology
Assessment Instrument:
The assessment instrument used to evaluate the aforementioned learning outcomes was a multiple-choice
question quiz. This quiz was given at the beginning of the course, and again at the end of the course in
both sections (Appendix A). In an effort to synchronize and better relate the two semesters of Principles
of Biology courses (Dr. Ghedotti teaches the first-semester course BL263: Organismic Biology), the first
five questions of this assessment quiz were similar to the ones Dr. Ghedotti used in his course assessment.
The questions in the assessment quiz given in BL260 can be categorized by learning outcomes as
illustrated in Table I.
Table I: Correlation between multiple choice questions and learning outcomes
Question Number and Topic
Learning Outcome
1- Solution making
5- Testable hypothesis recognition
2- Gene expression
3- Natural section (not covered in BL260 but in the
previous semester of Principles of Biology BL262)
4- Cell structure
6- Macromolecules
7- Metabolism
8- Mitosis/meiosis
9- Genetics
10- Gene regulation
None
a- Generally explain how science differs from
other ways of knowing
b- Define the major terms used in Cell Biology,
Genetics, and Molecular Biology
c- Explain the major organizing concepts in Cell
Biology, Genetics, and Molecular Biology
d- Recognize the social and ethical relevance of
content covered in Genetics and Biotechnology
Assessment Results and Analysis:
For all quizzes and in both sections, the numbers of correct answers per question were counted at the
beginning and at the end of the course, and the raw numbers were converted into percentages (Table II).
138
The initial correct answers correspond to correct answers in quizzes given at the beginning of the course
and the final correct answers correspond to correct answers in quizzes given at the end of the semester.
Overall, students’ correct answers changed from 59% to 72.3%, corresponding to a 13.3% increase,
indicating that, in general students learned and retained contents over the course of the semester.
Although this number indicates that the learning outcomes have been achieved, a closer analysis needs to
be conducted to further assess each of the learning outcomes independently.
Table II: Comparison of initial and final scores obtained in the assessment quiz (n=61, this number
excludes students that did not take the assessment quiz both at the beginning and end of the course in both
sections RU01 and RU02)
Question number and topic
Initial correct Final correct
answers (%) answers (%)
Correct answers changes (%)
1- solution making 24.6 32.8 +8.2
2- gene expression 78.7 85.2 +6.5
3- natural selection 88.5 83.6 -4.9
4- cell structure 67.2 65.6 -1.6
5- testable hypothesis 98.4 95.1 -3.3
6- macromolecules 67.2 96.7 +29.5
7- metabolism 57.4 54.1 -3.3
8- mitosis/meiosis 45.9 77.0 +31.1
9- genetics 31.1 86.3 +52.5
10- gene regulation 31.1 49.2 +18.1
Total 59.0 72.3 +13.3
The assessment of the learning outcome “a- Generally explain how science differs from other ways of
knowing” used questions numbers 1 and 5.
Question #1 that addresses content specifically covered in this course shows an 8.2% increase in
correct answer, while question #5 that addresses content covered in both introductory courses (BL262
and BL260) but greatly emphasized in the first semester of Biology shows a 3.3% decrease in correct
answer. Overall, this learning outcome has barely been met (+2.45%).
The assessment of the learning outcome “b- Define the major terms used in Cell Biology, Genetics, and
Molecular Biology” used questions numbers 2, 3, 4, and 6.
Questions #2 and 6 that address contents specifically covered in this course show respective increases
of 6.5% and 29.5%, while question #4 that addresses content covered in both introductory courses
(BL262 and BL263) but emphasized in the second semester of Biology shows a 1.6% decrease and
question #3 that addresses content only covered in the first semester of Biology shows a 4.9%
decrease. Overall, this learning outcome has been met (+7.37%).
The assessment of the learning outcome “c- Explain the major organizing concepts in Cell Biology,
Genetics, and Molecular Biology” used questions numbers 7, 8, 9 and 10.
All the questions address contents specifically covered in this course. Overall, this learning outcome
has been met (+24.6%).
Since the learning outcome “d- Recognize the social and ethical relevance of content covered in
Genetics and Biotechnology” was not assessed, no analysis can be drawn from it.
The data and analysis show that students generally retain biological content between semesters. Indeed,
even though the data show a little decrease in performance, the percentages of correct answers remain
high (e.g. 98.4% vs. 95.1%). Also, the data and analysis show that students performed much better when
tested on explanation of concepts (outcome #d) than when tested on terminology (outcome #c).
139
From these results and from the proposal for the distributive core revision, the following changes are
proposed.
Changes to be Implemented in this Course for the Next Academic Year (2009-2010)
• I will reiterate essential concepts that students have learned in the first semester of Biology
(BL262), and thus in collaboration with Dr. Ghedotti.
• I will strengthen and add material to more specifically address the learning outcome “a- Generally
explain how science differs from other ways of knowing”. Although my lectures heavily rely on
experimental data to explain theories, students often do not consciously recognize the
importance/relevance of this mode of knowledge.
• I will work at better defining terminology to more specifically address outcome “b- Define the
major terms used in Cell Biology, Genetics, and Molecular Biology”. For example, I will type
lists of biological terms and their corresponding definitions, will ask students to study with them,
and will specifically test them on selected terms.
• I will better explain two main biological concepts, cell structure/function and metabolism
(questions #4 and 7), and their integration with contents presented in the first semester of Biology.
The topic of cell structure/function is introduced in the first semester of Biology where students
clearly learned the difference between prokaryotic and eukaryotic cells (44.04% increase).
However, the same question displayed a 1.6% decrease when asked in the second semester of
Biology after the topic of cell structure/function was greatly expanded on. The topic of
metabolism was tested using a question that integrated both semester of Biology (question #7).
• I will further address outcome “c- Explain the major organizing concepts in Cell Biology,
Genetics, and Molecular Biology” by developing more problem-solving exercises.
• In order to assess the outcome “d- Recognize the social and ethical relevance of content covered
in Genetics and Biotechnology”, I will propose the following changes:
o Students already have to solve genetics and biotechnology problems. These problems sets
do not currently address either social or ethical relevance of the afore-mentioned biological
topics. I will modify these problems sets by transforming them into case studies that
integrate variations in the genetic material of various ethnic groups. The results of these
problems will be discussed not only in light of biological concepts previously learned but
also in light of ethnic diversity.
o I will modify my lectures on biotechnology to present students with targeted prevention
and implementation of medical treatments for specific ethnic groups.
Principles of Biology: Molecular and Cellular Biology laboratory course (BL261, RU01
to RU04 sections and BL261H, RU01 section)
Course Goals (as written in the syllabus):
This course will introduce students to scientific study design, use of primary literature, basic laboratory
skills, data interpretation, and presentation of scientific results. These exercises will be implemented
through the performing of experiments, including DNA recombination, designed to reinforce lecture
content. Each laboratory session will start with about 15 minutes of laboratory lecture, then students will
perform experiments, and finally the results of the experiments will be discussed.
Learning Outcomes (as written in the syllabus):
a. Generally explain how science differs from other ways of knowing
b. Propose, design, and execute a simple but rigorous scientific study/investigation
c. Analyze primary data to correctly test hypotheses in Molecular and Cellular Biology
d. Compose a clear, concise, and accurate primary research paper
140
e. Define the major terms used in Cell Biology, Genetics, and Molecular Biology
f. Explain the major organizing concepts in Cell Biology, Genetics, and Molecular Biology
Assessment Instrument:
The assessment instrument used to evaluate the aforementioned learning outcomes was a multiple-choice
question quiz. This quiz was given at the beginning of the course, and again at the end of the course in all
sections (Appendix B). The questions in the assessment quiz given in BL261 and BL261H can be
categorized by learning outcomes as illustrated in Table III.
Table III: Correlation between multiple choice questions and learning outcomes
Question Number and
Learning Outcome
Topic
7- Solution making a- Generally explain how science differs from other ways of knowing
b- Propose, design, and execute a simple but rigorous scientific
None
study/investigation
8- Testable hypothesis c- Analyze primary data to correctly test hypotheses in Molecular and
recognition
Cellular Biology
4- Primary research paper
d- Compose a clear, concise, and accurate primary research paper
title
1- Pipette
2- Calculation
e- Define the major terms used in Cell Biology, Genetics, and Molecular
3- Molecular equipment
Biology
5- Cellular equipment
9- Model organisms
6- Osmosis
10- Recombinant DNA
f- Explain the major organizing concepts in Cell Biology, Genetics, and
Molecular Biology
Assessment Results and Analysis:
For all quizzes and in all sections (BL261 and BL261H), the numbers of correct answers per question
were counted at the beginning and at the end of the course, and the raw numbers were converted into
percentages (Table IV). The initial correct answers correspond to correct answers in quizzes given at the
beginning of the course and the final correct answers correspond to correct answers in quizzes given at the
end of the semester. Overall and in both BL261 and BL261H, students’ correct answers increased by
19.9% and 18.8% respectively, indicating that, in general students learned and retained contents over the
course of the semester.
Table IV: Comparison of initial and final scores obtained in the assessment quiz for (n=66 for BL261 and
n=13 for BL261H, these numbers exclude students that did not take the assessment quiz both at the
beginning and end of the course)
Question number and topic
Initial
correct
answers
(%)
BL261 (RU01-RU04)
Final correct
answers (%)
Correct
answers
changes (%)
Initial correct
answers (%)
BL261H
Final correct
answers (%)
Correct
answers
changes (%)
1- pipetting 68.2 90.9 +24.7 100 84.6 -15.4
2*- solution making N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
3- equipment use 1 57.6 81.8 +24.1 100 100 0
4- paper writing 53 72.7 +19.7 46.2 100 +53.8
5- equipment use 2 68.2 78.8 +10.6 69.2 84.6 +15.4
6- osmosis 42.4 71.2 +28.8 38.5 69.2 +30.7
7- testable hypothesis 87.9 81.8 -6.1 92.3 100 +7.7
8- graphing 84.8 93.9 +9.1 84.6 84.6 0
141
9- model organism 77.3 98.5 +21.2 100 100 0
10- DNA recombination 33.3 81.8 +48.5 15.4 92.3 +76.9
Total 63.6 83.5 +19.9 71.8 90.6 +18.8
*Question #2 will not be analyzed as the initial assessment quiz contained an error.
As seen in the lecture course, the data show that students (whether those enrolled in BL261 or BL261H)
performed best when asked to explain the major organizing concepts in Cell Biology, Genetics, and
Molecular Biology (learning outcome #f). Also, students enrolled in BL261H were better prepared
(beginning of semester) and performed better (end of the semester) than students enrolled in the regular
sections (BL261 RU01-RU04).
Changes to be Implemented in this Course for the Next Academic Year (2009-2010)
• I will reiterate essential concepts that students have learned in the first semester of Biology
(BL263), and thus in collaboration with Dr. Ghedotti.
• I will design a quiz that generally better address all learning outcomes.
• I will emphasize some of the major biological concepts such as osmosis (question #6). Although
students generally learned and retained the information, I will ensure that most students can
analyze osmosis data at the end of the semester.
Conclusions
This series of formal outcomes assessments was the first I had done since I first joined Regis in 2001. I
found some information generated by these quizzes to correlate with 1) my informal evaluations of these
courses and 2) my formal students’ evaluations. However, I found that these quizzes did not completely
address and/or reflect the full extent of both my teaching and students learning. Nonetheless, I believe
these outcomes assessments can be very valuable tools and will implement appropriate modifications to
further evaluate the quality of my teaching.
142
Molecular and Cellular Biology Lecture (BL260, Spring 2009)
Assessment Quiz (2 points each question, 20 points total)
1) Which of the following is how to make a 2.5% agar
solution?
a. Add H 2 O to 0.25g agar to make 100ml
b. Add H 2 O to 2.50g agar to make 100ml
c. Add H 2 O to 25.00g agar to make 100ml
d. Add H 2 O to the molecular weight of agar in grams to
make 100ml
e. Add 0.25g agar to 100ml H 2 O
f. Add 2.50g agar to 100ml H 2 O
g. Add 25.00g agar to 100ml H 2 O
h. Find the molecular weight of agar, and then add that
many grams to 100ml H 2 O
2) Which of the following is the result of the processes
of transcription and translation?
a. A bacterium takes in a loop of DNA from the
environment
b. DNA information is used to construct a protein
molecule
c. Energy in the C-C bonds in a glucose molecule is
transferred to the phosphate-phosphate bond of ATP
d. Light energy is captured and stored in the C-C bonds
in a glucose molecule
e. None of the above
3) In natural selection, which of the following
determines which allele(s) cause greater reproduction by
individuals?
a. Chance
b. Environment
c. Level of inbreeding/outbreeding
d. Population size
e. None of the above
4) Which of the following is absent in a prokaryotic
cell?
a. Cytoplasm
b. DNA
c. Mitochondria
d. Plasma membrane
e. None of the above (all these are present)
5) Which of the following is a testable scientific
hypothesis?
a. An invisible and undetectable soul exists in each
human body
b. “g” is the abbreviation for the mass unit gram
c. I like toast
d. Men wash their hands less than women
e. None of the above (none are hypotheses)
Name
6) The four main types of macromolecules that
characterize living organisms are:
a. Monomers, polymers, DNA and RNA
b. Proteins, carbohydrates, DNA and RNA
c. Nucleic acids, proteins, carbohydrates and lipids
d. Monosaccharides, disaccharides, polysaccharides
and proteins
7) Which of the following sequences of events is correct
concerning abundant synthesis of ATP in autotrophic
organisms?
a. Glycolysis, pyruvate oxidation, Krebs cycle,
oxidative phosphorylation, and photosynthesis
b. Photosynthesis, glycolysis, pyruvate oxidation,
Krebs cycle, and oxidative phosphorylation
c. Photosynthesis, lactate fermentation, and alcoholic
fermentation
d. Glycolysis, fermentation, and photosynthesis
8) In eukaryotic cells, mitosis --- , while meiosis ---:
a. Allows for the formation of four daughter cells,
allows for the formation of two daughter cells
b. Allows for the formation of two daughter cells,
allows for the formation of four daughter cells
c. Allows for the formation of daughter cells with half
the genetic material as the parent cell, allows for the
formation of daughter cells with identical genetic
material as the parent cell
d. Allows for formation of daughter cells with identical
genetic material as the parent cell, allows for the
formation of daughter cells with half the genetic
material as the parent cell
e. a and c are correct
f. b and d are correct
g. a and c are correct
9) In humans, which of the following genotypes will
induce a “diseased” phenotype as it relates to a genetic
disorder that is autosomal dominant?
a. Either male or female AA
b. Either male or female Aa
c. Female aa
d. Male aa
e. a and b are correct
f. a and c are correct
10) As it relates to a transcription initiation complex,
which of the following associations is incorrect?
a. Enhancer-activator
b. Silencer-repressor
c. Promoter-basal transcription factor
d. Promoter-repressor
143
Molecular and Cellular Biology Laboratory (BL261/H, Spring 2009)
Assessment Quiz (3 points each question, 30 points total)
1) Which of the following pipettes would you
use to pipet 23µl?
a. A 10ml glass pipette
b. A 1000µl micropipetor
c. A 100µl micropipetor
d. A 10µl micropipetor
2) Which of the following corresponds to 87µg?
a. 0.087mg
b. 0.87mg
c. 87,000ng
d. 8,70ng
e. a and c are correct
f. a and d are correct
3) Which of the following devices would you use
to form a pellet and a supernatant?
a. A vortex
b. A stirring plate
c. A centrifuge
d. A heat block
4) Which of the following would be an
appropriate research paper title?
a. The macromolecules content in food
b. Proteins are more abundant in chicken than
in bread
c. The macromolecules content in bread versus
chicken
d. All of the above are appropriate
5) Which of the following devices would be the
most appropriate to observe mitochondria?
a. A dissecting microscope
b. Naked eyes
c. A compound microscope
d. A spectrophotometer
6) When a cell is placed in a hypertonic solution,
osmosis will induce the cell to:
a. Swell
b. Shrink
c. Remain normal
d. All above situations can happen
Name
The hypothesis is: Alcoholic fermentation in
yeast incubated at 37 o C produces more alcohol
than alcoholic fermentation in yeast incubated at
20 o C.
Table 1. Alcohol percentage from alcoholic
fermentation in yeast incubated at 37 o C and
25 o C. The data are not paired. P-value for
comparison = 0.0012
37 o C 12 15 14 16 16 12
25 o C 11 10 12 10 10 9
7) For these data and this hypothesis what type
of graph would be most appropriate?↑
a. Bar graph of means
b. Bar graph of samples
c. Histogram
d. Line Graph
e. Scatter Plot
8) The hypothesis is --- ↑
a. Rejected
b. Supported
c. This cannot be determined with these data
9) Which of the following animal model
organisms is the most commonly used to study
inheritance in general?
a. The chick Gallus gallus
b. The Amphibian Xenopus laevis
c. The sea urchin Lytechinus variegatus
d. The fruit fly Drosophila melanogaster
10) You are cutting a DNA plasmid of a total of
1800bp with a restriction enzyme that cuts at
position 200bp and position 1300bp. Which of
the following represents the correct number of
fragments and correct fragment sizes?
a. 1300bp
b. 200bp
c. 1100bp
d. 700bp
e. 1100bp and 700bp
144
Courses Outcomes Assessments for BL412 and BL413 (Developmental Biology
lecture and laboratory courses)
Fall 2008, Marie-dominique Franco
Developmental Biology lecture course (BL412)
Course Goals (as written in the syllabus):
This course will examine the organismal, cellular, genetic and molecular aspects of development in a
variety of animal model organisms (invertebrates and vertebrates). The principles for the current
knowledge of the developmental processes will be presented during the lectures and the laboratories will
allow you to investigate these processes using different model organisms.
Learning Outcomes (as written in the syllabus):
a. To provide an understanding of the different steps leading to the formation of a variety of fully
functional organisms by mainly focusing on the cellular and molecular mechanisms involved in
generating these organisms
b. To gain an appreciation for the species-specific diversity of the processes involved in generating fully
functional organisms
c. To gain an appreciation for the scientific method
Assessment Instrument:
The assessment instrument used to evaluate the aforementioned learning outcomes was a multiple-choice
question quiz. This quiz was given at the beginning of the course, and again at the end of the course in
both sections (Appendix A). Since only the first five questions are multiple-choice questions, only these
are being analyzed. The questions in the assessment quiz given in BL412 can be categorized by learning
outcomes as illustrated in Table I.
Table I: Correlation between multiple choice questions and learning outcomes
Question Number and Topic Learning Outcome
1-Early development
a- To provide an understanding of the different steps leading to the formation of a
3- Germ layer
variety of fully functional organisms by mainly focusing on the cellular and molecular
4- Gastrulation
mechanisms involved in generating these organisms
5-Hox genes
b- To gain an appreciation for the species-specific diversity of the processes involved in
2- Genome
generating fully functional organisms
None
c- To gain an appreciation for the scientific method
Assessment Results and Analysis:
For all quizzes, the numbers of correct answers per question were counted at the beginning and at the end
of the course, and the raw numbers were converted into percentages (Table II). The initial correct
answers correspond to correct answers in quizzes given at the beginning of the course and the final correct
answers correspond to correct answers in quizzes given at the end of the semester. Overall, students’
correct answers changed from 65.9% to 89.4%, corresponding to a 23.5% increase, indicating that, in
general students learned and retained contents over the course of the semester.
More specifically, it is clear that students come to this course with an excellent background as illustrated
by the initial scores of 100% and 82.3% for questions #1 and #3 respectively. The content of the first
question is introduced in the first semester of Principles of Biology: Organismic Biology (BL262), and
the content of the second question is introduced in other upper-division biology courses such as Human
and Comparative Vertebrate Anatomy (BL406). Students either retained the maximum scoring (100%) or
145
perform faultlessly at the end of the semester (100%) for these two questions. Also, students were able to
perform excellently (question #4) or poorly (question #5) at the end of the semester when tested on new
material.
Table II: Comparison of initial and final scores obtained in the assessment quiz (n=17, this number
excludes students that did not take the assessment quiz both at the beginning and end of the course)
Question number and topic
Initial correct Final correct
answers (%) answers (%)
Correct answers changes (%)
1- Early development 100 100 0
2- Genome 64.7 94.1 +29.4
3- Germ layer 82.3 100 +17.7
4- Gastrulation 41.2 100 +58.8
5- Hox genes 41.2 52.9 +11.7
Total 65.9 89.4 +23.5
Changes to be Implemented in this Course for the Next Academic Year (2009-2010)
• I will ensure all questions are multiple-choice questions for complete and impartial analysis.
• I will develop a separate lecture on Hox genes. These genes are currently explored sporadically
when used in the patterning of body axes.
• I will add one or two questions addressing the outcome c- To gain an appreciation for the
scientific method.
Developmental Biology laboratory course (BL413)
Course Goals (as written in the syllabus):
This course will examine the organismal, cellular, and molecular aspects of development in a variety of
animal model organisms (invertebrates and vertebrates) and will incorporate both classical and modern
experimental techniques. The principles for the current knowledge of the developmental processes will be
presented during the lectures and the laboratories will allow for the investigation of those processes using
different model organisms. The laboratory contents will not always correlate with the lectures’ materials,
therefore it is essential that you read your manual before each laboratory session. Although each
experiment is designed to be completed in 2 hours and 40 minutes, you will have to sometimes observe
and record developing organisms over the course of a week, following initial experimentations.
Learning Outcomes (as written in the syllabus):
a. To provide an understanding of the different steps leading to the formation of fully functional
organisms by mainly focusing on the molecular and cellular mechanisms
b. To gain an appreciation for the scientific method, to develop skills in critical analysis of
observations, data and scientific information
c. To develop skills on how to communicate scientific data
Assessment Instrument:
The assessment instrument used to evaluate the aforementioned learning outcomes was a multiple-choice
question quiz. This quiz was given at the beginning of the course, and again at the end of the course in
both sections (Appendix B). Since only the first seven questions are multiple-choice questions, only these
are being analyzed. The questions in the assessment quiz given in BL413 can be categorized by learning
outcomes as illustrated in Table III. This table shows that this quiz was not correctly designed to assess
the learning outcomes for this course. Thus the data generated do not permit a complete and precise
analysis of these learning outcomes. Many changes in the design of this quiz need to be implemented for
following years.
146
Table III: Correlation between multiple choice questions and learning outcomes
Question Number and Topic Learning Outcome
5-Early development culture
parameters
None
a- To provide an understanding of the different steps leading to
the formation of fully functional organisms by mainly focusing on
the molecular and cellular mechanisms
b- To gain an appreciation for the scientific method, to develop
skills in critical analysis of observations, data and scientific
information
7- Primary research paper title c- To develop skills on how to communicate scientific data
Assessment Results and Analysis:
For all quizzes, the numbers of correct answers per question were counted at the beginning and at the end
of the course, and the raw numbers were converted into percentages (Table IV). The initial correct
answers correspond to correct answers in quizzes given at the beginning of the course and the final correct
answers correspond to correct answers in quizzes given at the end of the semester. Overall, students’
correct answers changed from 58.0% to 71.4%, corresponding to a 13.4% increase, indicating that, in
general students learned and retained contents over the course of the semester. Except for question #4,
the increase is numbers of correct answers remain very low, hence the need for much revision in the way
the biological content is presented to the students, and in the way students are tested.
Table IV: Comparison of initial and final scores obtained in the assessment quiz (n=16, this number
excludes students that did not take the assessment quiz both at the beginning and end of the course)
Question number and topic
Initial correct Final correct
answers (%) answers (%)
Correct answers changes (%)
1- Pipette 100 100 0
2- Equipment use 87.5 81.2 -6.3
3- Model organism 1 43.7 62.5 +18.8
4- Model organism 2 50 93.7 +43.7
5- Early development culture 18.7 31.2 +12.5
6-Molecular technique 18.7 31.2 +12.5
7-Primary research paper title 87.5 100 +12.5
Total 58.0 71.4 +13.4
Changes to be Implemented in this Course for the Next Academic Year (2010-2011)
• I will ensure all questions are multiple-choice questions for complete and impartial analysis.
• I will fully redesign the assessment quiz to accurately correlate with all learning outcomes.
Conclusions
This series of formal outcomes assessments was the first I had done since I first joined Regis in 2001. I
found some information generated by these quizzes to correlate with 1) my informal evaluations of these
courses and 2) my formal students’ evaluations. However, I found that these quizzes did not completely
address and/or reflect the full extent of both my teaching and students learning. Nonetheless, I believe
these outcomes assessments can be very valuable tools and will implement appropriate modifications to
further evaluate the quality of my teaching. In general and pleasingly, upper-division students:
• Are better prepared than lower-division students
• Learn and retain more biological information than lower-division students
• Greatly benefit from a Biology curriculum that has been designed, so that our graduating students
will be well prepared for graduate-level instruction.
147
Appendix A:
Developmental Biology (BL 412, Fall 2008)
Assessment Quiz (30 points)
1) Which of the following sequences is the
appropriate sequence of developmental stages (2
points)?
a. Zygote, gastrula, morula, blastula and neurula
b. Zygote, morula, blastula, gastrula and neurula
c. Morula, zygote, neurula, blastula and gastrula
d. Zygote, blastula, morula, blastula and neurula
2) Which of the following genomic ploidies is the
most appropriate for generating transgenic organisms
(2 points)?
a. Diploidy
b. Triploidy
c. Tetraploidy
d. Pentaploidy
3) Most vertebrates organisms are formed through the
differentiation of three germ layers: the endoderm,
the mesoderm and the ectoderm. Which of the
following associations is/are not correct (2 points)?
a. Ectoderm - epidermis
b. Ectoderm - central nervous system
c. Ectoderm - epidermis and central nervous
system
d. Ectoderm - most muscles
e. Mesoderm - most muscles
f. Mesoderm - lining of the digestive tube
g. Endoderm - lining of the digestive tube
h. Endoderm - most muscles and lining of the
digestive tube
i. d and f
j. d, f, and h
Name
4) Gastrulation is one of the most important
processes during development. Which of the
following mechanisms is associated with gastrulation
(2 points)?
a. Intensive cell division
b. Formation of the three germ layers: endoderm,
mesoderm and ectoderm
c. Fertilization of the egg by a spermatozoan
d. Formation of the blastocoel
5) Which of the following gene families is involved
in patterning body axes (2 points)?
a. Gene segments encoding immunoglobulins
b. Genes encoding basic transcription factors
c. Hox genes
d. All of the above
6) Explain the difference between genes and proteins (5 points) and explain how these two types of molecules are
related (5 points) (10 points total).
Difference:
Relation:
7) Development generates cellular diversity. Thus, one of the main fundamental questions in Developmental
Biology is: 1) how does a fertilized egg give rise to the adult body? In your own words, propose molecular- and
cellular-level processes to answer this question (10 points). Note: You can list your answers and use the back of
this page if necessary.
148
Developmental Biology (BL 413, Fall 2008)
Assessment Quiz (30 points)
1) Which of the following pipettes is the most
appropriate to pipet 15µl (2 points)?
a. A 10ml glass pipette
b. A 1000µl micropipetor
c. A 200µl micropipetor
d. A 20µl micropipetor
2) Which of the following devices would be the most
appropriate to observe a spermatozoan (2 points)?
a. A dissecting microscope
b. Naked eyes
c. A compound microscope
d. A spectrophotometer
3) Which of the following animal model organisms is
the most commonly used to study fertilization in general
(2 points)?
a. The chick Gallus gallus
b. The Amphibian Xenopus laevis
c. The sea urchin Lytechinus variegatus
d. The fruit fly Drosophila melanogaster
4) Which of the following animal model organisms is
the most commonly used to study metamorphosis (2
points)?
a. The chick Gallus gallus
b. The Amphibian Xenopus laevis
c. The sea urchin Lytechinus variegatus
d. The fruit fly Drosophila melanogaster
Name
5) When growing early embryos (regardless of the
species), which of the following considerations is not
crucial to ensuing proper development (2 points)?
a. Adequate amount of food
b. Unsoiled growing medium
c. Density of individuals
d. Temperature
e. All are crucial
6) You need to investigate protein expression directly
during development. Which of the following techniques
would you use (2 points)?
a. Polymerase Chain Reaction
b. In situ hybridization
c. Western Blot
d. Northern blot
7) Which of the following titles is an appropriate
research paper title (2 points)?
a. Thyroid hormone and Xenopus laevis
b. Xenopus laevis embryos grown in thyroid hormone
at 37 o C
c. Thyroid hormone induces accelerated
metamorphosis in Xenopus laevis
d. Thyroid hormone induces accelerated
metamorphosis
8) You want to prepare 450ml of a solution of LiCl at 1.5M in dH 2 O. Knowing that the molecular weight of LiCl is
42.39g, how much solute would you need (4 points) and how much solvent would you need (4 points) to prepare your
solution (8 points total)? Note: you need to show your calculation for full credit.
9) In general, explain what a standard curve is used for (4 points) and using the following standard curve tell what
molecular weight fragment size (bp) corresponds to a migration at 20 mm (4 points) (8 points total).
Definition:
Fragment size:
- 149 -
APPENDIX V
Genetics BL414, Spring 2013
Team Name
Application TBL (#4: Linkage, DNA Synthesis and Recombination))
20 points (variable points per question)
Question 1 (8 points):
You are doing a three-point cross with Drosophila melanogaster investigating the follow genes v+, cv+
and ct+ where the mutant and recessive alleles are:
.v, vermilion eyes (bright red)
.cv, crossveinless wings
.ct, cut wing edges
The test cross is as follows: v+ cv ct X v cv ct
v cv+ ct+ v cv ct
(Note that the genes are organized in an arbitrary order at that point)
The following table shows gametes of the progeny with corresponding numbers
gametes Numbers of offspring Phenotype
v cv+ ct+ 580
v cv+ ct 3
v cv ct+ 45
v+ cv+ ct 40
v cv ct 89
v+ cv+ ct+ 94
v+ cv ct+ 5
v+ cv ct 592
a. In column 3 enter the corresponding phenotypes (1 point).
b. What is the order of the genes? Explain your rational for full credit (3 points).
c. Map the genes on the chromosome. Shaw all calculations for full credit (4 points).
- 150 -
Question 2 (4 points):
Two linked genes are separated by a distance such that exactly 4 percent of the cells undergoing meiosis
have one crossover between the genes and 96 percent have no crossover.
a. What is the percent recombination between the genes? You need to show your calculations (2
points).
b. Are the genes linked? Unlinked? Explain (1 point).
c. What distance separates the two genes (1 point)?
Question 3 (8 points):
The following electropherograms show the sequences of exon 3 of the gene WNT10 that has been
associated with ectodermal dysplasia; condition in which the development of skin, teeth hair, nails is
impaired. More specifically, exon 3 in a control individual (top), one parent (middle), and an affected
patient (bottom) are shown. (Color code: G is black, A is green, C is purple and T is red)
a. For each individual read the sequence and tell
the corresponding genotype (hint: the
sequences show only one allele for
homozygous individuals and only different
nucleotide for the heterozygous individual). (3
points).
b. Assuming the reading frame start at the first base in the sequence, give the corresponding amino
acid sequence for both control and affected individual (3 points).
c. From your answers above, tell whether ectodermal dysplasia is an autosomal recessive,
autosomal dominant or sex-linked disorder (2 points).
- 151 -
APPENDIX VI
- 152 -
- 153 -
- 154 -
- 155 -
- 156 -
- 157 -
- 158 -
- 159 -
- 160 -
- 161 -
- 162 -
- 163 -
- 164 -
APPENDIX VII
- 165 -
APPENDIX VIII
Alexandra Lynch
Dr. Marie-Dominique Franco
Tri-Beta Research Scholarship Application
8 September 2011
Indirect Immunofluorescence to Investigate the Role of Hairy Protein, Encoded by a Pair-Rule
Abstract:
Gene, in the Development of the Central Nervous System in Drosophila melanogaster
Pair rule genes, a type of segmentation gene in Drosophila melanogaster, have been found to be
expressed in specific regions of the head and specific cells of the Central Nervous System in Drosophila
embryos. Specifically, the pair rule gene Hairy is used in this project. Preliminary protein expression
analysis shows specific staining present within the region extending from the brain to the anal pad, with
an especially intense area within the developing brain and the first cord pair. The working hypothesis
for the continuation of this project is that the Hairy protein is not only involved in body segmentation,
but also in the development of the Central Nervous System. The hypothesis will be investigated through
employment of indirect immunofluorescence protocol, using the antibody Elav as a positive control.
Outline of Proposed Project:
Segment polarity genes found in Drosophila melanogaster are expressed in the cellular embryo,
enabling individual cells to interact with one another. Segment polarity genes serve to reinforce
parasegmental periodicity, as well as establish cell-fate within each parasegment through cell-cell
communication; the diffusion of certain proteins across each parasegment create morphogen gradients
that then determine cell fate (Larsen et al., 2008). Segment polarity genes are a type of segmentation
gene; others include: maternal effect genes, gap genes, homeotic selector genes, and pair rule genes.
Pair rule genes in particular divide the embryo into fourteen parasegments. Pair rule genes are
expressed along the anterior-posterior axis in seven alternate bands. The expression of pair rule genes
begins in syncytial embryos during the thirteenth mitosis event. High levels of certain pair rule proteins
- 166 -
activate the expression of certain segment polarity genes, while low levels of other pair rule proteins
activate the expression of different segment polarity genes; the two are co-dependent.
Previous RT-PCR experiments have shown that the following pair rule genes: giant, button-head, evenskipped,
fushi tarazu, and labial are expressed at all stages of Drosophila development: embryo, larvae,
pupae, and adult (Personal communication: Dr. Franco). More precisely, pair rule genes have been
found to be expressed in specific regions of the head and specific cells of the Central Nervous System,
indicating a potential role of pair rule genes within the Central Nervous System (Gutjahr et al., 1993).
To better decipher the location, and thus role, of these genes, protein expression analysis was performed
using an antibody against the protein encoded by the pair rule gene Hairy (Figure 1). The expression of
Hairy solely within embryos was investigated. The discrepancy between the nature and identity of the
gene investigated was forced by the inaccessibility of many antibodies; this dictated the usage of Hairy.
Indirect immunofluorescence was performed, using the primary antibody Hairy, and the secondary
antibody Dylight 488-conjugated AffiniPure Donkey Anti-Mouse IgG (green fluorochrome).
Anal
Pad
Spinal
Cord:
faint
staining
Brain:
cord
pair
Figure 1: Hairy Protein Expression in Segmented Drosophila Embryo
*Note: Non-specific staining for anal pad
- 167 -
The result shows specific staining present within the region extending from the brain to the anal pad,
with an especially intense area within the developing brain and the first cord pair. These results suggest
that Hairy protein is specifically expressed within the Central Nervous System of Drosophila embryos.
Thus, this project aims to focus upon the Central Nervous System in particular, and the presence, or
perhaps role, of Hairy within that development.
The working hypothesis for the continuation of this project is that the Hairy protein is not only involved
in body segmentation, but also in the development of the Central Nervous System. In order to address
this question experimentally, indirect immunofluorescence protocol will be followed. Initially, the
embryos will be raised, then dechorionated, and fixed via methanol. Following methanol fixation, the
embryos will undergo rehydration. Then, the primary unlabeled antibody, Anti-Hairy, 1 µg/ml, will be
added, followed by a PBST wash. Prior to the wash, the secondary, labeled, antibody, Donkey-Anti-
Mouse, 1.5 mg/ml, will be added. The embryos will then be mounted onto a slide, and analyzed using
immunofluorescent microscopy. To more thoroughly investigate the hypothesis, this protocol will also
be performed with an antibody known to be present within the Central Nervous System of Drosophila,
Elav, serving as a positive control and basis of comparison. Elav is detected at the birth of the first
neurons within the developing embryonic nervous system of Drosophila (Robinow and White, 1991).
The pattern of expression will then be compared amongst the two antibodies. Previous research
suggests that the Elav expression pattern will parallel that of Hairy, supporting the hypothesis.
References:
Gutjahr, T., Frei, E., Noll, M. (1993). Complex regulation of early paired expression: initial activation
by gap genes and pattern modulation by pair-rule genes. Development. 117:609-623.
Larsen, C., Bardet, P.L., Vincent, J.P., and Alexandre C. (2008). Specification and positioning of
parasegment grooves in Drosophila. Developmental Biology. 321: 310-312.
Robinow, S. and White, K. (1991). Characterization and spatial distribution of the Elav protein during
Drosophila melanogaster development. Journal of Neurobiology. 22:443-461.
- 168 -
APPENDIX IX
SPARC: Student Research Fund Proposal
Immunocytochemical Analysis of the Fascin Protein Expression as a Tool to Investigate
Changes in Microvillar Expression in Developing Sea Urchin Embryos
Non-Technical Summary:
The aim of this proposal is to analyze the changes in expression of microvilli, microscopic hairlike
structures expressed at the surface of cells as an extension of the plasma membrane, in developing
sea urchin embryos Lytechinus variegatus. More specifically, this proposed research seeks to report the
spatio-temporal expression of the protein fascin, specifically expressed in the microvilli, as a means to
investigate the redistribution of these microvilli during early development in sea urchins. The detection
of the fascin protein will be performed using indirect immunofluorescence with a mouse anti-fascin
primary antibody and a Dylight 488 donkey anti-mouse secondary antibody (green fluorescence). Note:
This proposal is a resubmission of a proposal sent on May 05, 2011. The proposal was not funded, and
we believe this modified version addresses all SPARC committee comments.
Proposal Narrative:
Introduction
In sea urchins, the early stages of development comprise several periods that can be divided into
five different stages. The zygote stage refers to the newly fertilized egg through the completion of the
first cell cycle. The cleavage stage refers to an intense regular mitotic division period, from which, as
the egg divides, a solid sphere of cells or morula is generated. The blastula stage refers to the formation
of a hollow sphere of cells surrounding a central cavity called blastocoel. The gastrula stage refers to
the formation of three germ layers: the ectoderm, the mesoderm, and the endoderm, all giving rise to a
prism. Finally, the early larval stage refers to a swimming, food-seeking individual or pluteus larva
- 169 -
(Figure 1). The proposed study seeks to investigate microvillar expression from the zygote stage (to
establish a baseline and confirm previous findings with our technology) to the prism stage when the
larva becomes a food-seeking individual (to complete current knowledge and add molecular precision).
Figure 1: Early developmental stages of the
sea urchin Lytechinus variegatus showing (A)
unfertilized egg, (B) 2-cell stage embryo, (C)
4-cell stage embryo, (D) morula, (E) early
blastula, (F) gastrula, (G) early pluteus larva
or prism, and (H) more differentiated pluteus
larva. (A-F) 20X original phase contrast
micrographs and (G, H) 20X original bright
field micrographs taken with Leica DM2500
optics (Franco, 2009).
The eukaryotic cell’s intracellular structure is maintained by mostly three types of protein fibers,
each specifically contributing to the formation, maintenance and movement of the cell’s cytoskeleton.
From larger to smaller, the microtubules are composed of polymerized tubulin proteins that are mainly
involved in cell shape and movement of organelles within the cells. The intermediate filaments are
composed of various polymerized proteins that are mainly involved in maintaining the overall structure
of the cell by anchoring all organelles. Finally the microfilaments are composed of polymerized actin
proteins that are mainly involved in cellular movement including gliding, contraction and cytokinesis
(cytoplasmic division of a cell following the division of the nucleus). These smallest protein fibers, the
microfilaments, can further organize themselves either into networks when cross-linked by filamin
cross-linkers or into cables (bundles) when cross-linked by fascin, villin, or myosin cross-linkers.
In sea urchin, actin microfilaments play a central role in the fertilization process (Otto et al.,
1980), the formation of the contractile ring during cytokinesis to cleave the zygote into several
blastomeres (Mabuchi, 1994), and the relative spatial relationship of these blastomeres within the
fertilization envelope during early development (Showman and Foerder, 1979). While the formation of
the contractile ring involves the actin-bundling protein myosin, the formation of the fertilization cone,
- 170 -
the formation of the fertilization envelope, as well as the
establishment of the precise spatial relationship of
blastomeres during early development involve the actinbundling
protein fascin, distinctively localized in thousand
of microvilli or microscopic hair-like structures (Figure 2).
This proposal seeks to investigate the spatio-temporal
expression of the fascin protein molecules as a tool to
specifically analyze the changes in microvillar expression
in developing sea urchin embryos. Indeed, coupled with
the specific structure of microvilli, fascin is an ideal
Figure 2: Scanning electron micrographs
of a fertilized sea urchin egg showing
microvilli (a and b) and transmission
electron micrographs of these microvilli (c
and d) (Burgess and Schroeder, 1977).
molecular marker to investigate the redistribution of microvilli during sea urchin development.
Objectives
Although attention has been given to the redistribution and elongation of microvilli during
fertilization with the formation of the fertilization cone that allows for the engulfment of the sperm cell
after fusion of the two gametes (Tilney and Jaffe, 1980) and the formation of the fertilization envelope
leading to the formation of the hyaline layer (Burgess and Schroeder; 1977, Otto et al., 1980; Begg et
al., 1982), only one study has reported the presence and redistribution of these microvilli during the
cleavage phase of early development (Showman and Foerder, 1979). Thus, this proposal seeks to
further explore microvillar expression by using the specific molecular tracking of the fascin protein
through fluorescent microscopy and by extending the range of development stages passed the cleavage
phase of development. We believe that the proposed research will greatly contribute to a better
understanding of the role of microvilli not only in early development but also in later morphogenesis,
after the embryos have hatched from their fertilization envelope past the blastula stage. Based on the
- 171 -
current knowledge, we hypothesize that the fascin tracking will reveal a complex microvillar dynamics
during early development of sea urchins. In addition, we hope that the following proposed experiments
will serve as pilot experiments to be included in the next Developmental Biology laboratory course
(BL413) taught by Dr. Franco.
Methodology
In order to obtain live sea urchin embryos of various stages, fertile male and female adult sea
urchins are needed to induce fertilization events that will generate all embryos. Our previous proposal,
sent on May 05, 2011, included the establishment and maintenance of a sea urchin colony in the Biology
Department, so that fertilization events could be performed at any time without relying on external
supply of live sea urchins, which had been standard protocol in the Biology Department. After receiving
SPARC comments on the unlikeness to succeed in establishing such a colony, we decided that indeed,
our effort will be best spent performing and repeating the experiments, thus we decided to order fertile
adult sea urchins Lytechinus variegatus (Item #1 in budget) as we did in the past and set up as many
fertilization events as possible in one day, to generate all necessary embryos. The embryos will be then
fixed and stored at desired stages for immunocytochemistry experiments that will be performed
throughout the Fall 2011 Semester.
Male and female sea urchins gametes will be collected by injecting 1-2ml of 0.5M KCl into the
coelomic cavity surrounding the mouth on the oral (flat) surface of each sea urchin This sudden
increase in intracellular potassium will cause the smooth muscles of the gonads to contract, releasing
gametes from the gonopores located on the aboral (rounded) surface of each individual. Once the
gametes are collected, in vitro fertilization will proceed by setting a specimen glass dish with 100ml of
sea water and 5ml of the previously collected egg suspension. Then, 1ml of freshly activated (diluted)
sperm suspension will be added to the dish that will be placed into an environmental chamber set at
- 172 -
25 o C (Franco, 2009). The newly generated embryos will be collected at various stages (as mentioned
earlier) in separate glass vials and fixed in by immersion into –20°C, 90% MeOH/50 mM EGTA, pH 6.0
for at least 10 minutes (Harris,1986).
For the immunfluorescent spatio-temporal analysis of the fascin protein, fixed embryo samples at
various stages of development will be rehydrated in PBS on separate coverslips, incubated in blocking
buffer (5% milk in PBST) for 4 hours at room temperature in a humidified chamber, followed by an
overnight incubation with mouse anti-fascin primary antibody (Item #2 in budget) at 4°C in a humidified
chamber. Coverslips will be washed in PBST and the embryos will be then incubated with Dylight 488
donkey anti-mouse secondary antibody (green fluorescence) for one hour at 37°C and washed in PBST
prior to mounting on microscopic slides (Schnackenberg and Marzluff, 2002). Fluorescent micrographs
will be then taken with a Leica DM2500 optics microscope located in the Biology Department and
analyzed for the spatio-temporal expression of the fascin protein in developing sea urchin embryo to
investigate microvillar expression.
References
Begg, D.A., Rebhun, L.I., and Hyatt, H. (1982) Structural organization of actin in the sea urchin egg
cortex: Microvillar elongation in the absence of actin filament bundle formation. J. Cell Bio. 93:24-32.
Burgess, D.R. and Schroeder, T.E. Polarized bundles of actin filaments within microvilli of fertilized sea
urchin eggs. J. cell Bio. 74:1032-1037.
Franco, M-d. (2009) From Molecules to Organisms: An Investigative approach to the Developmental
Biology Laboratory. Reno, NV: Bent Tree Press.
Harris, P.J. (1986) Cytology and Immunocytochemistry. Methods Cell Bio. 27:243-262.
Otto, J.J, Kane, R.E. and Bryan, J. (1980) Redistribution of actin and fascin in sea urchin eggs after
fertilization. Cell Motility. 1:3-40.
Mabuchi, I. (1994) Cleavage furrow: timing and emergence of contractile ring actin filaments and
establishment of the contractile ring by filament bundling in sea urchin eggs. J. Cell Sci. 107:1853-
1862.
Showman, R.M. and Foerder, C.A. (1979) Removal of the fertilization membrane of sea urchin embryos
employing aminotriazole. Exp. Cell Res. 120(2):253-255.
Schnackenberg, B.J. and Marzluff, W.F. (2002) Novel localization and possible functions of cyclin E in
early sea urchin development. J. Cell Sci. 115:113-121.
Tilney, L.G., and Jaffe, L.A. (1980) Actin, microvilli, and the fertilization cone of sea urchin eggs. J.
Cell Bio. 87(3):771-782.
- 173 -
Benefits of the Project to Regis University, the Biology Department, and the Student Meghan Moroze
University: This research would benefit Regis University by enabling students to grow and learn
independently from a classroom setting. This will provide value to Regis University because it will
broaden the spectrum for which students will be able to acquire knowledge in the future. This research
project better prepares students for real laboratory experience after graduation in all biology fields.
Department: One of the benefits of the aforementioned experiments to the Biology Department
is the opportunity to develop further support for similar proposals and enhanced recognition from the
Regis community as an even more outstanding department. In addition, this particular project will serve
as a pilot project to develop experiments to be included in the next Developmental Biology laboratory
course (BL413) taught by Dr. Franco. Also, I will be conducting this research as part of the TriBeta
Biological Honor Society, thus helping grow the undergraduate research program in the Department.
Student: This research project will be of great value to me. It will give me an experience to work
in a laboratory independently, which I have not had previously. It also will allow me to further explore
the specific field of Developmental Biology. Because I have not taken this course yet, it will give me a
hands-on experience of how development occurs in organisms. I will be able to relate the knowledge
gained from this project to future job opportunities, classes and other research projects. I plan on
furthering my career in biology by pursuing medical school or another graduate degree. Conducting this
research will help me understand the importance of biology and how it relates to other aspects of life.
Statement of Support from the Faculty Sponsor Marie-dominique Franco
I fully support this project and the Biology Department has all necessary supplies/equipment
except the ones we asked for in the budget to conduct the proposed experiments. In addition, I have
extended experience working with sea urchins and fluorescent microscopy.
- 174 -
Budget:
Item # Item Vendor Item # Unit Price
Total
Price
1
Sea Urchin
Embryology
Live Set
(14 fertile male
and female adult
sea urchins)
Carolina Biological
Supply Company
http://www.carolina.com
162500
$102.60
$44.95 for
Freight and
Handling (see
attached quote)
$102.60
$44.95
2
Fascin Primary
Antibody
abcam
http://www.abcam.com
Ab78487 $325.00 $325.00
Grand Total $472.55
- 175 -
APPENDIX X
- 176 -
APPENDIX XI
SPARC Faculty Fund Cover Sheet
Date: August 23, 2007
Principal Investigator(s):
Name: Marie-dominique Franco
Department: Biology
School: Regis College
Telephone: 303-458-4198
Email: mfranco@regis.edu
Name: _________________________________________________________
Department: ____________________________________________________
School: ________________________________________________________
Telephone: _____________________________________________________
Email: _________________________________________________________
Project Title: Scholarships of Teaching and Application: Developmental Biology Laboratory
Manual
Amount Requested: $4,999.16
Project Abstract (one paragraph):
Developmental Biology is the study of the process by which multicellular organisms grow
and develop, from the union of male and female gametes (spermatozoon and egg) to the
formation of an adult individual. Developmental Biology is a multidisciplinary field that includes
Embryology (study of embryos), Cytology (study of cellular structure and function), Genetics
(study of inheritance), Molecular Biology (study of the molecules of life) and Evolution. As a
Developmental Biologist and since I joined Regis College in the Fall of 2001, I have taught
both lecture and laboratory courses three times (BL412/143). Teaching a laboratory course
requires the need of a laboratory manual, specific textbook that contains various experiments
for students to complete and analyze. The first year I taught this course, out of two published
laboratory manuals that I considered most relevant to my course, I selected the one I found
most appropriate to teach my students important experimental designs and concepts in the
field of Developmental Biology. I soon realized that this textbook was not measuring to my
expectations as it did not address the multidisciplinary level mentioned above and I started to
write my own laboratory manual. I have worked on this project over the years and have
already used this partial manual in my laboratory course. However, this manual is not
- 177 -
completed and needs to be professionally published. In order to finish and publish this manual
I will be dedicating my upcoming sabbatical leave, in the Spring of 2008, to this project.
Indeed, my sabbatical leave proposal has been accepted by Regis College and I also have a
contract with Bent Tree Press publisher with a deadline of May 15, 2007.
According the guidelines distributed by the Regis College Rank and Tenure Committee and
according to Glassick et al., (1997), the writing of this laboratory manual falls into the
categories of both scholarship of teaching and scholarship of application. It falls into the
category of scholarship of teaching because I have and will continue to write various
experiments that have been and will continue to be tested in class, therefore allowing me to
refine pedagogical goals and it falls into the category of scholarship of application as well
because this manual will serve Regis College and undergraduate students at-large.
This grant proposal is to request fund 1) to obtain the necessary material to perform the
experiments that will be incorporated in the laboratory manual, 2) to obtain the necessary
material to illustrate the laboratory manual and, 3) to provide a modest stipend for my research
assistant, Patrick Oakes, candidate for a Master of Arts, Master of Biological Illustration from
the School for Professional Studies (SPS), Regis University.
Current and Pending Support for the Proposed Project: None
Title: _________________________________________________________________
Sponsor: ______________________________________________________________
Amount Awarded or Requested: _______________________
Title: __________________________________________________________________
Sponsor:
_____________________________________________________________
Amount Awarded or Requested: ___________________________________________
- 178 -
Regis University
SPARC
Faculty Fund Budget
Personnel $500.00
Fringe $0.00
Travel $0.00
Supplies and Materials $4,499.16
Equipment
$(included above)
Other $0.00
Total $4,999.16
Preferred method of budget management (Please check one of the following boxes):
□ Faculty member is issued the check, keeps track of receipts, and submits them with any other
appropriate forms (e.g., Convention Travel). The student submits them to either the Budget
Manager or Academic Grants Office. Receipts are considered proof of expenditures. Any funds
not expended must be returned to Regis University.
X SPARC funds are transferred to the Program or Departmental budget. The Program/Department
responsible for disbursing funds and collecting receipts for the business office.
Revised 8/07
- 179 -
Regis University Faculty Fund Proposal for October 1 st , 2007
Deadline
Scholarships of Teaching and Application: Developmental Biology
Laboratory Manual
Marie-dominique Franco
Associate Professor of Biology, Regis College
Marie-dominique Franco
Regis University
Department of Biology, Mail code D-8
3333 Regis Boulevard
Denver, CO 80221
Tel: 303-458-4198
Fax: 303-964-5480
mfranco@regis.edu
- 180 -
I) Lay Summary
Developmental Biology is the study of the process by which multicellular organisms grow and
develop, from the union of male and female gametes (spermatozoon and egg) to the formation of an
adult individual. Developmental Biology is a multidisciplinary field that includes Embryology (study of
embryos), Cytology (study of cellular structure and function), Genetics (study of inheritance), Molecular
Biology (study of the molecules of life) and Evolution. As a Developmental Biologist and since I joined
Regis College in the Fall of 2001, I have taught both lecture and laboratory courses three times
(BL412/143). Teaching a laboratory course requires the need of a laboratory manual, specific textbook
that contains various experiments for students to complete and analyze. The first year I taught this
course, out of two published laboratory manuals that I considered most relevant to my course, I selected
the one I found most appropriate to teach my students important experimental designs and concepts in
the field of Developmental Biology. I soon realized that this textbook was not measuring to my
expectations as it did not address the multidisciplinary level mentioned above and I started to write my
own laboratory manual. I have worked on this project over the years and have already used this partial
manual in my laboratory course. However, this manual is not completed and needs to be professionally
published. In order to finish and publish this manual I will be dedicating my upcoming sabbatical leave,
in the Spring of 2008, to this project. Indeed, my sabbatical leave proposal has been accepted by Regis
College and I also have a contract with Bent Tree Press publisher with a deadline of May 15, 2007.
According the guidelines distributed by the Regis College Rank and Tenure Committee and
according to Glassick et al., (1997), the writing of this laboratory manual falls into the categories of both
scholarship of teaching and scholarship of application. It falls into the category of scholarship of
teaching because I have and will continue to write various experiments that have been and will continue
to be tested in class, therefore allowing me to refine pedagogical goals and it falls into the category of
scholarship of application as well because this manual will serve Regis College and undergraduate
students at-large.
This grant proposal is to request fund 1) to obtain the necessary material to perform the experiments
that will be incorporated in the laboratory manual, 2) to obtain the necessary material to illustrate the
laboratory manual and, 3) to provide a modest stipend for my research assistant, Patrick Oakes,
candidate for a Master of Arts, Master of Biological Illustration from the School for Professional Studies
(SPS), Regis University.
- 181 -
II) List of Current and Pending Support for the Proposal and most Recent SPARC
Funding
The research project associated with this grant proposal does not have any other support whether
active or pending.
My only and most recent SPARC funding for the proposal entitled “Functional Relationship
Between Pax-6 Protein Expression in the Olfactory Epithelia and Habitats of Selected Amphibians”, was
granted on May 06, 2004 for the amount of $4,500.00.
- 182 -
III) Narrative
A- Objectives, Qualifications, and General Plan of Work with Time-Line
Objectives and Qualifications
In essence, the writing of a scientific textbook, in this particular case, a laboratory manual requires:
1) The survey of existing published laboratory manuals.
2) An extensive academic literature review and selection of content materials that best illustrate the
overall field in both historical and current perspectives.
3) The design of scientific experiments that best exemplify concepts while requiring critical
analysis of data in light of past and current knowledge.
4) The performing and troubleshooting of the experiments to ensure their efficient running.
5) The professional writing and illustration of these experiments.
6) The dissemination which entails the publication of the laboratory manual by a reputable scientist
publisher.
In the following paragraphs, I will address each point individually and tell how my qualifications will
allow me to complete this project.
1) Survey of existing published laboratory manuals.
Prior to first teaching my Developmental Biology laboratory course, I had extensively reviewed
available laboratory manuals, concentrating on both concepts and techniques. Although the thorough
examination of the two manuals I had pre-selected left me unsatisfied, I chose the one I considered the
most appropriate to teach my first Developmental Biology laboratory course. During the course of the
semester, it became very apparent to my students and I that the concepts presented were too focused on
historical embryology, therefore lacking in current knowledge, and that the scientific techniques were
too obsolete. Students were only partially able to correlate concepts presented in lectures to experiments
they conducted, as current information was not investigated. Also, students were not exposed to current
biological techniques used in professional research laboratories. As a scientific instructor and scholar, I
believe it is my responsibility to not only give students an historical perspective but also provide them
with modern and current information (theory and practice) as scientific research, in general and by
definition, is an ever-evolving field. Thus, I started to developed my own laboratory manual and have
been using it since. This laboratory manual is only partially written and is not suited yet for professional
publication, hence this proposal.
I am well qualified to assess the validity of existing Developmental Biology laboratory manuals
because this field is my field of expertise and because I have used them in the past while teaching my
laboratory course.
2) Extensive academic literature review and selection of content materials that best illustrate the
overall field in both historical and current perspectives.
In the process of developing this laboratory manual, I spent a tremendous amount of time during
both academic years and summers reviewing textbooks, laboratory manuals, peer-reviewed review
articles and peer-reviewed primary research articles pertaining to the field of Developmental Biology.
The dichotomy between availability of modern conceptual information and unavailability of modern
laboratory experiments, even more substantiated the need for a contemporary laboratory manual. The
topics I selected for inclusion into my manual reflect both the progression and the multidisciplinary
aspect of the field of Developmental Biology. The laboratory manual starts with classical experiments
pertaining to the sub-field of Embryology, continues on with state-of-the-art experiments pertaining to
the sub-field of Molecular Developmental Biology and will end with experiments pertaining to the
- 183 -
flourishing sub-field of Evolutionary Developmental Biology (Evo-Devo). Although I already have a
draft outline of the sequence of the experiments I want to include in the manual, much remains to be
completed.
I am well qualified to review academic literature in the field of Developmental Biology because, as
mentioned above, this field is my field of expertise and I have been reading, editing and writing articles
on Developmental Biology for the past 12 years.
3) Design of scientific experiments that best exemplify concepts while requiring critical analysis of
data in light of past and current knowledge.
Although some experiments have already been designed and implemented, here again, much remains
to be completed (see a sample of chapters in Appendix B). Thus far, experiments exploring classical
Developmental Biology using anatomical and cellular approaches have already been designed and
implemented twice. These experiments investigate the processes of fertilization using live sea urchins
(Lytechinus variegatus) and amphibians (Xenopus laevis) and also investigate the processes of early
development in these selected animal species. Experiments exploring modern Molecular Developmental
Biology using molecular genetic approaches have also already been designed and implemented once.
These experiments investigate the processes of gene regulation leading to precise spatio-temporal
expression of proteins necessary for differentiated cells to perform their functions; These experiments
are also conducted in live animals, here developing chick embryos (Gallus gallus). Dissimilarly to the
previous sets of experiments, these latter need to be refined and trouble shot as discussed in the
following section. Experiments exploring the fairly new area of Evolutionary Developmental Biology
have not been designed yet. All experiments included in this manual will use live and developing model
organisms in order to best train students to “real” research experience. In addition, assignments such as
simple interpretation of results to the writing of scientific papers will be included at the end of each
laboratory to allow students to analyze data and to present them in a professional scientific format.
I am well qualified to design scientific experiments in the field of Developmental Biology because,
as mentioned above, this field is my field of expertise and I have been conducted these types of
experiments for the past 12 years. Also, because I have taught a laboratory course in this field many
times already, I know how to customize experiments to allocated time and to undergraduate academic
level.
4) Performing and troubleshooting of the experiments to ensure their efficient running.
A large amount of my sabbatical period will be spent performing and trouble shooting the designed
experiments. At this point in time, half of the experiments remained to be performed and trouble shot.
Last semester, Chelsea Ruller (Junior Biology major enrolled in BL491, Undergraduate Research in
Biology), was working in my laboratory running experiments focusing on Molecular Developmental
Biology. We were investigating the pattern of Pax-6 and β-catenin protein expressions in developing
chick embryos using Western blot analysis. More specifically fertilized chick eggs were being
incubated to reach critical developmental stages to allow dissection of developing brain, heart and
muscles. Total proteins from these organs were being extracted, quantified and separated using
polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis, where antibodies specific to Pax-6 and β-catenin were being
incubated, thus revealing expression of these proteins. These particular proteins were being investigated
because of their role in the morphogenesis of brain and heart and muscle was used as a negative control
as these proteins do not participate in the muscle development (Figure 1). The result of these
experiments provided a solid basis for the refinement of this section of the manual. During my
sabbatical period I will need to reconduct these experiments for image captioning and will also need to
- 184 -
perform experiments pertaining to the sub-field of Evolutionary Developmental Biology. I am confident
I will finish these experiments in the allocated time as I have been performing similar ones as part of my
own research program. Indeed, part of my research program focuses on the evolution of olfactory
epithelium in amphibians. More specifically I am interested in proteins responsible for sensing either
water or airborne sensing odorants in developing olfactory epithelia of aquatic and terrestrial
amphibians. The experiments I propose to include in my laboratory manual will investigate expression
of mRNA encoding Pax-6 and Distal-less proteins using in situ hybridization technique and the
amphibians I propose to use are: the Oriental fire bellied toad (terrestrial, Bombina orientalis), the
African dwarf toad (aquatic, Hymenochirus curtipes) and the Japanese fire newt (aquatic, Cyanops
pyrrhogaster).
Figure1: Xin expression in the fusion of left and right primordia in
chicken embryo (stage 9, B and 10, C). The cells fated to become the
myocardium are stained positive for Xin mRNA (Wang et al., 1999).
I am well qualified to perform and troubleshoot Developmental Biology experiments because I have
published many peer-reviewed articles in the field of Developmental Biology (Franco et al., 2007,
Franco et al., 2001 and Vogt et al., 2002) and because the new science building will be outfitted with
state-of-the-art facilities and equipments.
5) Professional writing of these experiments.
Although some experiments have already been written, here again, much remains to be completed.
All experiments have already been and will continue to be written using scientific laboratory manual
standards. I am well aware that publishers have their own specific requirements and I will edit my
manual accordingly. The following represents the general sequence I have used for each laboratory
experiment:
• Background information on the topic to be investigated, including citation of academic
literature.
• Background information on the scientific techniques to be used, including citation of
academic literature.
• Protocol leading students, step by step, to the completion of the experiment.
- 185 -
• Assignments for data analysis (exercise or writing of scientific research paper).
• Illustrations requiring either drawings or photographs of developmental series and protein
expression in selected tissues of developing embryos.
Illustrations of scientific textbooks are generally used to better convey both concepts and procedures.
My current laboratory manual contains such illustrations as shown in Appendix B, however I will not be
able to use the current illustrations because of copyright laws. Indeed, using the current images that I
found in various sources was not a problem as long as the manual was not professionally published, but
using these same images for professional publication is forbidden by copyright laws. Therefore, I will
need to de novo generate all illustrations (photographs and drawings).
I am well qualified to professionally write Developmental Biology experiments because I have
published many peer-reviewed articles in the field of Developmental Biology and because the use of the
partial manual in my course have already proven to be very well received by my students (Franco et al.,
2007, Franco et al., 2001 and Vogt et al., 2002, Appendices A and B). Also my Research Assistant
Patrick Oakes, candidate for a Master of Arts, Master of Biological Illustration from SPS at Regis
University, is well qualified to generate scientific illustrations under my supervision.
6) Dissemination which entails the publication of the laboratory manual by a reputable scientist
publisher.
After peer-analysis, I believe that this finished Developmental Biology laboratory manual will be
very unique in its progressiveness; indeed its concept has already gained the interest of many publishing
companies. After being in contact with these publishing companies, I have signed a contract with Bent
Tree Press in which the final manuscript is to be delivered on May 15 of 2007 (see contract in Appendix
C).
General Plan of Work with Time-Line
For the Fall of 2007, I have been granted a course release as my Individual Component of the faculty
workload will be dedicated to starting on the project associated with this proposal (Faculty Status
Agreement, Regis University and the Chapter, 2006-2008 section 12.5.3). During this time I intend to
primarily work with my Research Assistant Patrick Oakes on the professional drawing of developmental
series of the species that will be used in the manual, namely the sea urchin Lytechinus variegatus, the
frog Xenopus laevis and the chicken Gallus gallus. These developmental series will be purchased as
sectioned and fixed microscope slides and will not involve wet experiments as the Biology Department
will use retrofitted classrooms as laboratories during this time period. Indeed, I will not be able to start
the wet experiments until the Spring 2008 when the renovation of the science building will be
completed.
During the Spring of 2008 and while on sabbatical leave, I intend to perform all of the experiments
necessary to complete the project, to write them in a format suited for publication and to illustrate them.
The experiments will be conducted on live animals species namely the frogs Xenopus laevis, Bombina
orientalis and Hymenochirus curtipes, the newt Cyanops pyrrhogaster and the chicken Gallus gallus.
All of these tasks will be performed simultaneously, per chapter to insure better time management.
The deadline for the delivery of the final manuscript to Bent Tree Press is May 15, 2007 and I am
confident my Research Assistant and myself can meet this deadline. Patrick and I have already started
to work toward this project during the summer of 2007.
- 186 -
B- Expected Significance
The significance of the proposed work is three-folded. It will greatly benefit Regis College students
as the laboratory manual mirror principles I develop in lectures and it will also greatly benefit
undergraduate students at-large as the textbook I use in lectures is also used by most Developmental
Biologist instructors. In addition this manual will improve the Developmental Biology experience at
Regis College, therefore improving the Biology Department academic curriculum.
C- Relation to my Longer-Term Goals and Scholarship in my Discipline
While my scholarly activities will always, to some extent, include activities in the category of the
scholarship of discovery, theses past two years I decided to shift some of my efforts to the categories of
the scholarship of teaching and the scholarship of application. As Glassick et al., (1997) state, “Lessons
learned in the application of knowledge can enrich teaching, and new intellectual understanding can
arise from the very act of application” (p. 9). The scholarly project I have started in the Spring of 2006
in collaboration with Brandi Trujillo, at the time Biology major senior, completely embraces this form
of scholarship. With the aim of developing and implementing state-of-the-art experiments in my
Developmental Biology laboratory course, I developed a set of experiments using chemical reagents that
had not been previously tested on developing chick embryos. More specifically, Brandi and I sought to
explore the reactivity of various antibodies (used to detect the presence or absence of corresponding
proteins) on a range of developing chick tissues. The results of our experiments will allow me to use the
positively reacting antibodies in my Developmental Biology laboratory course. The results of our
findings will be incorporated in my laboratory manual and I also intend to submit our findings for
publication in the technical bulletin issued by Abcam®, the Biotechnology Company that manufactures
the antibodies we used.
D- Relation to the Present State of Knowledge in the Field
As mentioned earlier, the experiments included in this laboratory manual fall into three categories;
experiments pertaining to the historical sub-field of Embryology, to the ever-progressing sub-field of
Molecular Developmental Biology and to the emerging and flourishing sub-field of Evolutionary
Developmental Biology. While the first category of experiments are based on concepts and theories that
have been discovered this past century but still remain correct, the two other categories of experiments
rely on concepts and theories that are currently investigated. The extensive literature review of the subfields
of Molecular Developmental Biology and Evolutionary Developmental Biology has already
allowed me to select principles that I will develop with the proposed experiments. Therefore, this
manual will parallel current knowledge in the field of Developmental Biology.
IV) References Cited
Franco M.D, Bohbot J, Fernandez K, Hanna J, Poppy J and Vogt R. (2007) Sensory Cell Proliferation
within the Olfactory Epithelium of Developing Adult Manduca sexta (Lepidoptera). PLoS ONE 2(2):
e215. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0000215.
Franco M.D., Pape M.P., Swiergiel, J.J. and Burd G.D. (2001) Differential and overlapping expressions
patterns of X-dll3 and Pax-6 genes suggest distinct roles in the olfactory system development of the
African clawed frog Xenopus laevis. Journal of Experimental Biology, 204:2049-2061.
Glassick, C.E., Huber, M.T. and Maeroff, G.I. (1997) Scholarship Assessed. Evaluation of the
Professoriate. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Vogt, R.G., Rogers, M.E., Franco M.D. and Sun, M. (2002). A Comparative Study of Odorant Binding
Protein Genes: Differential Expression of the PBP1 - GOBP2 Gene Cluster in Manduca sexta
- 187 -
(Lepidoptera) and the organization of OBP genes in Drosophila melanogaster (Diptera). Journal of
Experimental Biology, 205:719-744.
Wang, D-Z., Reiter, R.S., Lin, J., Wang, Q., Williams, H.S., Krob, S.L., Schultheiss, T.M., Evans, S.,
and Lin, J. (1999). Requirement of a novel gene, Xin, in cardiac morphogenesis. Development 126,
1281-1294.
V) Explanation of the Benefits of the Project to Regis University, the Biology
Department and Myself
Some of the benefits of the project to Regis University at-large are the publicity and recruitment tool
that the Admission offices can use. Indeed, prospective students often look at books/articles published
by faculty members in order to asses the level of scholarship schools possess. Another benefit to Regis
University at-large is the collaboration between Regis College and the School for Professional Studies,
indeed my Research Assistant Patrick Oakes (candidate for a Master of Arts, Master of Biological
Illustration from SPS) will be able to use the work he will be doing on this project as part of the
requirement for his Master degree.
One of the benefits to the Biology Department and as mentioned earlier, is that this manual will
improve the Developmental Biology experience at Regis College, therefore improving the Biology
Department academic curriculum. Also, the acquisition of several small pieces of equipment will be
used in upper-division teaching laboratories and will also be shared among the Biology faculty
members, thereby increasing the overall infrastructure for research and education.
One of the benefits to myself lies in the process of developing this manual as I will be able to
dedicate an entire semester to the field of Developmental Biology and acquire current knowledge.
Another benefit to myself is that, when published, the use of the manual will allow me to teach a
smoother and more professional laboratory course.
- 188 -
VI) Budget
Most of the items listed below are consumable chemicals or live animals that cannot be reused, and the
Biology Department cannot cover their cost as they will solely be used for this scholarly project. The
other items are not actually possessed by the Biology Department and will need to be purchased for the
completion of this project, here again these items cannot not be covered by the Biology Department.
Item/explain. Vendor Unit Price Quantity Shipping Total
These items will be used to perform the proposed experiments
Sea urchin embryology composite Ward’s
microscope slide
#92W8330
$6.80 2 $8.00 $21.60
Sea urchin Pluteus larva
Ward’s
microscope slide
#92W8331
$4.60 2 N/A $9.20
Preserved frog developmental Ward’s
stage
#69W2278
$46.50 1 N/A $46.50
Ward’s
#92W9010 (12h)
#92W9015 (18h)
#92W9020 (21h)
#92W9025 (24h)
#92W9040 (33h)
$9.50
$10.00
$8.80
$12.70
$12.30
1
1
1
1
1
Chicken development microscope
slides at different developmental
#92W9055 (40h)
#92W9060 (48h)
$12.30
$12.30
1
1 $16.00 $220.10
stages
#92W9065 (48h)
#92W9080 (72h)
#92W9085 (72h)
#92W9090 (96h)
#92W9095 (96h)
#92W9096 (composite
cs)
$24.70
$12.30
$25.80
$21.50
$25.80
$16.10
1
1
1
1
1
1
Xenopus laevis proven breeders
(male and female).
NASCO
#LM00456M $60.00 1 $60.00 $120.00
Tadpoles stages 40 to 47
NASCO
#LM00460M
$20.60 2 $20.00 $61.20
Tadpoles stages 48 to 55
NASCO
#LM00450M
$34.00 2 $20.00 $88.00
Tadpoles stages 56 to 63
NASCO
#LM00452M
$27.80 2 $20.00 $75.60
Adult Xenopus brittle
NASCO
#SA02764(LM)M
$5.00 1 $5.00 $10.00
Tadpole Xenopus brittle
NASCO
#SA05964(LM)M
$5.00 1 $5.00 $10.00
Post-metamorphic Xenopus brittle
NASCO
#SB29027(LM)M
$5.00 1 $5.00 $10.00
Bombina orientalis frog Pets’ mart $10.00 5 N/A $50.00
Hymenochirus curtipes frog Pets’ mart $10.00 5 N/A $50.00
Cyanops pyrrhogaster newt Pets’ mart $10.00 5 N/A $50.00
Instant Ocean synthetic sea salt Pets’ mart $9.29 1 N/A $9.29
AquaSafe water conditioner that
needs to remove chlorine and
chloramine
MS-222 (tricaine methane
sulfonate, for anesthesia)
Human chorionic Gonadotropin to
induce eggs laying
Pets’ mart $5.00 1 N/A $5.00
Sigma
#E1,052-1
Sigma
#C1063
$13.80 1 $15.00 $28.80
$23.85 1 $22.00 $45.80
- 189 -
3,3’,5-triiodo L thyronine (T3) to ICN Biomedicals
accelerate metamorphosis #02152171.1
$19.55 1 $15.00 $34.55
Fertile unincubated eggs CBT Farms $0.85 20 $80.00 $97.00
BSA
Sigma
#A-7906
$31.10 1 N/A $31.10
Protein assay dye reagent Bio-Rad
concentrate
#500-0006
$78.00 1 $10.00 $88.00
Pre-stained SDS-PAGE standards Bio-Rad
(broad range)
#161-0318
$90.00 1 $15.00 $105.00
Ready gel Tris-HCl (4-20% linear
Bio-Rad
gradient, 10 wells with 50 l
#161-1159
each) for Western analysis
$8.00 30 $15.00 $255.00
Plastic cuvettes (for protein
quantification) spectrophotometer
(polystyrene, 10mm, 1.5 ml)
VWR
#14-385-952
$84.19
1 case
(500)
$10.00 $94.19
Tris-HCl pH= 6.8
Sigma
$54.80
#93347
(250g)
1 $10.00 $64.80
Glycerol
Sigma
#G5516
$41.30 1 $10.00 $51.30
SDS
Sigma
#L4390
$42.80 1 $10.00 $52.80
Glycine
Sigma
#241261
$30.00 (50g) 1 $10.00 $40.00
Methanol
Sigma
#M3641
$29.00 (1L) 1 $80.00 $109.00
Acetic Acid
Ward’s
$47.60
#971W1008
(2.5L)
1 $50.00 $97.60
Nitrocellulose membrane
Bio-Rad
#162-0212
$107.00 1 $15.00 $122.00
Egg candler to stage embryos in Strombergs' Chicks
the shell
#DC
$175.00 1 N/A $175.00
Normal donkey serum
Sigma
$17.90
#D9663
(10 ml)
4 $5.00 $76.60
Anti-Pax-6 antibody
Covance
#PRB-278P
$157.00 1 $20.00 $177.00
Anti-Xin antibody
BD Biosciences
Pharmigen
$195.00 1 $20.00 $215.00
#611524
Donkey anti-rabbit HPR antibody
Jackson
ImmunoResearch $84.00 2 $15.00 $183.00
#711-035-152
Donkey anti-mouse HPR antibody
Jackson
ImmunoResearch $84.00 2 $15.00 $183.00
#715-035-150
DAB enhanced liquid substrate Sigma
system
#D 6815
$166.50 1 $20.00 $186.50
Gel drying system
Ward’s
#36W3247
$89.00 1 $5.00 $94.00
Fine-point forceps
Ward’s
#14W0541
$1.99 5 $5.00 $14.95
Medium-point forceps
Ward’s
#14W1001
$1.99 5 $5.00 $14.95
Watchmaker forceps
Ward’s
#14W1400
$5.95 5 $5.00 $34.75
Surgical scissors Ward’s $4.25 5 $5.00 $26.25
- 190 -
#14W0980
Polyethylene dissecting pan set
Ward’s
#18W3665
$9.50 2 $5.00 $24.00
Sub-total $3,558.43
These items will be used to illustrate the proposed experiments
Intuitos3 (9x12) pen tablet for Wacom
digital drawing of images #PTZ930
$449.95 1 $50.00 $499.95
Abobe Illustrator software for John Twigg, ITS, Regis
digital montages
University
$75.00 1 N/A $75.00
Adobe Acrobat for creation of John Twigg, ITS, Regis
PDF files
University
$71.00 1 N/A $71.00
E197FP 19 inch Flat Panel LCD
Monitor to be able to
Dell
$262.00
$212.00 1 $50.00
simultaneously work with text and # 320-5003
images
Strathmore Series 400 Drawing
Paper 18in x 24in pad, Smooth
Surface
Amazon
# B000KNI8XS
$13.89 2 $5.00 $32.78
Sub-total $940.73
Stipend for my Research Assistant Patrick Oakes
I am requesting a lump sum of $ 500.00 for Patrick’s work during the period encompassing the entire 2007-2008
academic year. I did not use the Student Payroll rates because Patrick will work more than the allocated hours.
Note: Patrick is and will still be employed by Regis University as an Administrative Coordinator in the Registrar
Office.
Sub-total $500.00
Grand
Total
$4,999.16
- 191 -
VIII) Appendices
Appendix B: Sample of Chapters to be Included in the Manual
Sea Urchin Gametes, Fertilization and Early Development
I) INTRODUCTION
The life of a new individual is initiated by the fusion of genetic material from the two gametes,
egg and sperm cell. This fusion, called fertilization stimulates the egg to begin development by first
producing the formation of a zygote or 1-cell embryo. The early stages of development comprise
several periods that can be divided into five different stages. The Zygote stage refers to the newly
fertilized egg through the completion of the first cell cycle. The Cleavage stage refers to an intense
regular mitotic division period generating a solid sphere of cells or morula. The Blastula stage refers
to the formation of a hollow sphere of cells surrounding a central cavity called blastocoel. The
Gastrula stage refers to the formation of three germ layers; the ectoderm, the mesoderm and the
endoderm, and finally the Early Larval stage that refers to a swimming, food-seeking individual or
pluteus (in the case of sea urchin). In the sea urchin Lytechinus variegatus, the eggs are isolecithal,
containing sparse and evenly distributed yolk, and the cleavage is holoblastic or complete and radial. A
series of the different early development stages and timing in Lytechinus variegatus are represented in
Figures 1, 3 and table I.
Sea Urchins have been a favorite system for studying various problems in classical embryology
and modern developmental biology. Like many marine organisms, fertilization in sea urchins is
external. Usually a female will release or spawn her eggs into the seawater, which will trigger males
and other females nearby to spawn as well. This intense spawning of many individuals, together with
the fact that hundreds of millions of eggs and billions of sperm cells are released by female and male
urchins respectively, assure that fertilization will be successful. For the biologist this is very important
as it means that vast quantities of gametes can be obtained for analysis of development and that the onset
of fertilization can be controlled by mixing the gametes together at the appropriate time. Today we will
first demonstrate the procedure for obtaining gametes. Then, you will study the gametes and observe
fertilization and early development and will begin some simple experiments with gametes and embryos.
Figure 1: Lytechinus variegatus viewed from the side. Panel A, 1-cell zygote; the fertilization envelope is visible
as a large halo around the embryo and the arrow points to the site of sperm penetration. Panel B, 2-cell embryo.
Panel C, 8-cell embryo. Panel D, 16-cell embryo. Panel E, 32-cell embryo or morula showing macromeres and
micromeres. Panel F, G and H respectively represent the blastula, gastrula (showing blastocoel, mesenchyme
cells and blastopore) and larval pluteus stages. This figure has been modified from Hardin and Morill, U of W (G
and H).
- 192 -
Table I: Timing of early development and cell types in Lytechinus variegatus. The timing is highly temperaturedependent
and under the microscope at warmer temperature, cell divisions are faster. This figure has been
modified from worms.zoology.wisc.edu/urchins/SUcleavage_stages.html.
Early developmental stages
Time in seconds, minutes,
hours and days at 25 o C
Cell types and germ layers
Fertilization
Insemination
Exocytosis of cortical granules
Initiation of the fertilization membrane elevation
Completion of cortical granules exocytosis
Completion of the fertilization membrane elevation
Hyaline layer is formed
Fertilization membrane is hardened
0 second
30-40 seconds
35-50 seconds
60-70 seconds
65-80 seconds
2 minutes
5 minutes
Zygote stage 5 minutes Undifferentiated
Starts at 30 minutes (2-cell Mesomeres, macromeres and
Cleavage stage
stage)
micromeres
Blastula stage Starts at 24 hours Blastomeres
Gastrula stage
Starts at 48 hours
Endoderm, mesoderm and
ectoderm layers
Early larval stage Starts at 5 days Various cell types
II) PROCEDURES
A- Obtaining Male and Female Gametes
Several species of sea urchins could be used for our experiment but we are at the mercy of the
normal cycles of gametogenesis in these animals. We will work with the species Lytechinus variegatus
as it produces good eggs and sperm cells from May through September. Lytechinus variegatus is a pink
and white Florida sea urchin with short spines. Under natural condition, the cold temperature of the
seawater prevents the animals from spawning until that time. In the laboratory, we will trigger spawning
by injecting 1-2 ml of 0.5 M KCl into the coelomic cavity of the adults. This sudden increase in
intracellular potassium will cause the smooth muscle of the gonads to contract, releasing gametes from
gonopores on the aboral (rounded) surface of the animal (Figure 2). Eggs are pigmented yellow-orange
and are collected by inverting the female over a small beaker of seawater. Eggs are shed directly into
the seawater and are allowed to settle to the bottom of the beaker. Once the eggs settle to the bottom,
we will decant the old seawater and wash the eggs twice with fresh seawater. The sperm suspension is
white and is collected dry by simply pipetting off the sperm from the aboral surface and place it into a
clean Eppendorf tube. The sperm must be kept on ice and concentrated until it is needed for
fertilization.
Figure 2: Bottom (A) and top (B) views respectively showing the oral and aboral surfaces of a sea urchin test.
Side view of the internal sea urchin anatomy (C).
- 193 -
Figure 3: Early development of Lytechinus variegatus at 25 o C showing an unfertilized egg at 0 second post
fertilization (Panel A), a fertilized egg at 5 minutes post fertilization (Panel B), a first cleavage (Panel C), a 2-cell
stage embryo at 25 minutes post fertilization (Panel D), a 4-cell stage embryo at 45 minutes post fertilization
(Panel E and F), a 8-cell stage embryo (Panel G), a morula stage (Panel H) and a blastula stage (panel I). This
figure has been modified from http://www.usp.br/cbm/artigos/ourico/prancha.jpg.
- 194 -
B- Observation of Sea Urchin Gametes
1) Activate the sperm by diluting 1 drop of the dry sperm suspension into 10 ml of seawater into a
16 x 100 mm screw cap glass tube. Mix with a clean transfer pipette to obtain a uniform, faintly
cloudy suspension. This step is very important as an excess of sperm can lead to polyspermy.
Polyspermy refers to the entry of more than 1 sperm cell into an egg, resulting in abnormal,
arrested development. Since sperm activation requires several minutes, the dilute sperm
suspension should be allowed to stand for 5 to 8 minutes before use but no longer than 10
minutes.
2) Prepare a slide of activated sperm by placing a few drops of activated sperm on a slide and
adding a coverslip. Sperm cells are highly differentiated cells, streamlined to perform their two
functions of triggering development by penetrating the egg and supplying a haploid set of
chromosome from the male parent.
3) Because of the small size of the sperm cells (about 10 µm), observe the cells using a 100X oil
immersion objective lens on a phase contrast compound microscope.
4) Measure the size of the sperm cells using a transparent mm ruler.
5) Record the size and make careful and detailed drawing of these sperm cells in your research
notebook.
6) Prepare a slide of eggs by placing a few drop of the egg suspension and a few drops of 0.01%
Janus Green on a slide and adding a coverslip. The Janus Green will allow you to see the jelly
coat. Most eggs would have completed meiosis before spawning. As a result, you may be able
to see the pronucleus containing the maternal chromosomes and some polar bodies. However,
the later may have fallen away from the egg during spawning. Sometimes artificial spawning
will cause parthenogenetic activation of the eggs. Therefore it is important to watch for raised
fertilization envelope before fertilization with sperm.
7) Measure the size of the eggs using a transparent mm ruler (about 106 µm).
8) Record the size and make careful and detailed drawing of these eggs in your research notebook.
C- In vitro Fertilization
1) Place 3 drops of the egg suspension on a slide and cover and cover with a cover slip.
2) Place a drop of activated (diluted) sperm suspension at one edge of the coverslip and watch for a
few minutes.
3) You should be able to watch the sperm cells approach the egg and contact the outer vitelline
envelope of the egg.
4) Observe fertilization carefully and record in detail what you see in your research notebook using
Figures 1, 3 and table I as references. The most observable event will be the formation of the
fertilization membrane that is the raised vitelline envelope containing a clear hyaline layer. If
less than 2/3 of the eggs are fertilized, add more activated sperm suspension.
5) In order to prevent the slide from drying during the microscope viewings, store it in a covered
Petri dish with a moistened Kimwipe R in the bottom of the dish.
6) Repeat the fertilization using slides and coverslips several times if you want to be able to observe
what happens in careful detail.
7) Set-up another fertilization in a specimen glass dish by transferring several drops of washed eggs
with 100 ml of seawater. You should see a thinly scattered layer of eggs at the bottom, if not,
adjust accordingly. Add 2 or 3 drops of the activated sperm suspension (not older than 10
minutes) and mix the sperm and eggs by stirring very gently with a clean transfer pipette.
- 195 -
8) Once all the eggs are fertilized, pour off the supernatant and add clean seawater. This step
eliminates extra sperm cells that can degenerate and prevents the water from fouling around the
developing embryos.
D- Caring for Developing Embryos and Larvae and Fixing different stage embryos
1) Put a loose-fitting aluminum foil cover over the specimen dish and put it in the 20 o C chamber
until you are ready to make the observations described in Figures 1, 3 and table I.
2) It is very important that you care well for your embryos, as your grade for the assignment on sea
urchin development module will depend on the quality of your results. Try to come in frequently
during the next week to follow the development of normal embryos.
3) Every time you observe a new stage or a new anatomy within a given stage e.g. different
cleavage embryos, different pluteus larvae, you will have to fix and clear the embryos to allow a
better view of internal structures the following week.
4) Remove the embryo from the specimen dish using a cut transfer pipette and transfer it in a glass
vial containing 10 ml of Carnoy’s fixative and incubate about 1 hour at room temperature. You
can have several embryos of the same stage in the same vial. Make sure to label your vials with
your name, time post-fertilization and stage.
5) Pour-off the fixative in the appropriate waste bottle, being very careful not to loose your embryos
and add another 10 ml of fresh fixative. Incubate from 1 hour to overnight at room temperature.
It will be best to incubate overnight.
6) Pour-off the fixative in the appropriate waste bottle and add 10 ml of clearing solution. Leave
the vials on the bench until the following week.
7) When the blastulae eventually hatch, between 7 and 10 hours post fertilization, you will be able
to see them swimming near the surface of the water in the upper part of the dish. Sometimes
shining a flashlight through the culture can help you visualize the swimmers. Once a substantial
number of blastulae have hatched, pour the swimmers into a clean specimen dish. Make sure to
avoid pouring the non-swimmers and unhatched blastulae into the clean dish to avoid the water
from fouling.
8) Aerate the culture twice daily by repeatedly and gently pipetting air using a transfer pipette to the
bottom of the culture and discard any dead embryos. Be sure not to suck the embryos in and out
of the pipette.
9) Once you observe the pluteus larvae (the pluteus larva starts with no arm, then shows 2 arms, 4
arms and 8 arms), you will need to feed them, change the water everyday and continue the
aeration twice daily. To change the water, cut the tip of a transfer pipette and gently transfer the
individual into the clean dish once at the time. In addition, transfer the culture into a 500 ml
specimen glass dish.
10) Feed the pluteus larvae once a day by adding 3 drops of diluted liquid invertebrate food.
11) Record all observation with time post fertilization in your research notebook and you may also
try to take pictures of the different stages.
E- Interfering with Fertilization (Make sure to set-up negative controls for the 3 following
experiments)
1) Many of the events important to fertilization depend upon the jelly coat surrounding the egg.
What do you think would happen if you removed this jelly? You can remove it by exposing the
eggs to seawater that has been adjusted to a pH of 5. Swirl the eggs for 2 minutes in the pH: 5
seawater and then return them to the normal pH: 8 seawater. Add the sperm as in procedure C1-
- 196 -
5 and record observations and results in your research notebook. How do the sperm cell behave?
Does fertilization occurs?
2) Certain events of fertilization rely on sodium pumps through which sodium is pumped into the
egg. If sodium were unavailable to the egg, what would happen to fertilization? Try to answer
this question repeating fertilization as in procedure C1-5 and using sodium-free seawater.
Record observations and results in your research notebook.
3) Calcium is also very important in fertilization as the fertilizing sperm triggers a series of calcium
signals vital to a successful fertilization. Indeed calcium is necessary for the acrosomal reaction,
which is the fusion of the acrosomal vesicle and the sperm cell plasma membrane resulting in the
extension of the acrosomal process. Calcium is also necessary to the cortical granule reaction.
The calcium ions needed for these two mechanisms are not a result of an influx of calcium, but
come from within the egg itself. Therefore withdrawing calcium during fertilization would not
alter these processes. Investigate the importance of the extracellular calcium during fertilization
by repeating procedure C1-5 and using calcium-free seawater. Record observations and results
in your research notebook.
F- Analysis of Results and Assignments
1) As you are doing your experiment discuss with your partner what questions you would like to
ask regarding sea urchin gametes, fertilization and early development. For example you could
ask if larval development is affected by temperature, pollution, fresh water or darkness. This
exercise will give you some ideas for your independent project.
2) Introduction/hypothesis for Sea Urchin Early Development Continued in notebook.
3) Record your results and observation in the Results section of your research notebook. Use
percentage of fertilized eggs versus unfertilized eggs; you will then have to count your eggs
before fertilization. This has to be done in the in the laboratory classroom.
- 197 -
Appendix C: Bent Tree Press contract
- 198 -
- 199 -
APPENDIX XII
- 200 -
- 201 -
- 202 -
- 203 -
- 204 -
- 205 -
- 206 -
- 207 -
- 208 -
- 209 -
- 210 -
- 211 -
- 212 -
- 213 -
- 214 -
- 215 -
- 216 -
- 217 -
- 218 -
- 219 -
- 220 -
- 221 -
- 222 -
- 223 -
- 224 -