Emily Kara Teaching Portfolio
Table of Contents
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Introduction……………………………………………………………………………………………2
Teaching and Learning Philosophy……………………………………………………...…...4
CV……………………………………………………………………………………………………...……7
Reflection 1 and Artifact 1: Informal Science Education……………………………12
Reflection 2 and Artifact 2: Instructional Materials Development……………...24
Reflection 3 and Artifact 3: Delta Internship………………………………………….…34
[DEAR DELTA REVIEWER: I have edited my philosophy according to the
recommendations for all sections except 6- the Delta Internship reflection and
artifact (final report). I will get to this section in more detail later this month. For
now, you can read it if you like, but it still has comments from the last review
embedded, most of which I have not yet addressed.
Feedback on sections 1-5 would be greatly appreciated.
I have shuffled the order of the figures so all the numbering is correct as referred to
in text, but the figures are not consecutive. I will fix that after the ordering is more
finalized.
I am having a problem addressing learning through diversity in text. I want to
represent this authentically but I’m having a hard time. Any ideas?
Finally, what do you think about the order of the reflections? I think it would be nice
if the way I mention them in philosophy is paralleled in the ordering of the
reflections that follow. Is there a better way they should be ordered in philosophy?
Thanks!!]
1
1. Introduction to this Teaching Portfolio
Early in my doctoral program in Environmental Engineering at University of
Wisconsin (UW), my research advisor suggested I get involved in the Center for the
Integration of Research, Teaching, and Learning (CIRTL, a.k.a. the ‘Delta’ program) on
campus. I started by attending the ‘Expeditions in Learning’ seminar, a course that explored
different spots on campus that teachers could visit with learners for educational
experiences outside of the classroom (e.g. the Zoology Museum). This was my first taste of
the Delta program, but because it was just one of many courses I took during my first
semester at UW, I am sorry to say that I don’t think I understood just then what Delta was
all about. I also began attending Delta Roundtable dinners, which I have enjoyed attending
each semester since the fall of 2007. At these dinners, teaching and learning topics are
presented on, followed by roundtable discussions over dinner at the Memorial Union. I
always recommend the Roundtable dinners to people who want to learn more about Delta
because its an opportunity for attendees to get a firsthand view of three Delta Pillars: the
Learning Community that is physically present together with shared interest in a
teaching/learning issue; Teaching-as-Research that is often the focus of the keynote
presenters, who frequently share data, results, and experiences from the classroom; and
the Learning-through-Diversity invariably occurs at each tabletop discussion, among a
group that typically represents many types of diversity including age, gender, ethnicity,
career stage, department, and disciplinary focus. The Roundtable dinners remain one of my
favorite ways to stay engaged in the teaching, research, and learning community on campus.
As my involvement in the Delta program continued, I completed two graduate level
courses in which I developed instructional materials and created a tabletop science exhibit
for public audiences. During my Internship, I applied the pillar of Teaching-as-Research to
study how undergraduates make use of optional space to answer complex questions using
graphs. Finally, I have compiled and synthesized my work to date in this teaching portfolio,
which details the highlights of my experiences made possible through the framework of the
Delta program.
The portfolio includes my Teaching and Learning Philosophy; my curriculum vitae,
which can be used to frame my teaching interests; and three reflections on key projects I
have completed during my doctoral degree at the UW. The reflections are also paired with
selected artifacts related to the projects, including graphics, photos, data, and results.
Synthesizing the materials into the portfolio may be as important as any one of the projects
alone: it has given me a reason to solidify my teaching and learning values, and to codify
the findings of my research and work over the past five years.
I am ever grateful to my research advisor Dr. Trina McMahon for encouraging and
supporting my Delta-related activities, to Dr. Robert Bohanan for advising me on two of the
projects, to my Delta course instructors, to the Delta staff, and to the learning communities
that have- in bits and pieces- been present with me along the journey. The Delta Program
2
made me into a more thoughtful and rigorous teacher and learner, and has improved me as
a person along the way.
3
2. Emily Kara- Teaching and Learning Philosophy
“You can never step in the same river twice” – Heraclitus (c. 500 BC)
I believe that the perspective of every learner constantly evolves by the addition of new
knowledge and experiences: Heraclitus’ statement aptly describes the lifelong process of
learning. I approach teaching, research and learning as iterative processes that develop and
improve with time and according to the environment. As a teacher, I strive to give learners
authentic and effective experiences in environmental science and engineering that allow
them to evolve, from wherever they may begin, by focusing on four principles: enthusiasm
leads to learning, teaching-as-research, real-world problem solving, and hands-on
experience.
Enthusiasm leads to learning I believe that teachers’ intellectual energy and enthusiasm
are contagious qualities that are critical to learners’ engagement in course material. I put
this principle into practice not only when teaching, but when conveying my research in
seminars, as a course lecturer, and as a mentor, intending that my energy has the potential
to inspire my audience. I bring enthusiasm by practicing positivity, curiosity, and by using
dynamic presentation materials that use visual, audio, reading, and kinesthetic media to
convey materials. I welcome impromptu interactions between my audience and myself. I
believe that learners become engaged by making a strong connection to the science
through inspiring instruction, which may not always be planned, but can spark the flame of
curiosity, and this holds true at all levels- from introductory general education to
specialized upper level courses.
Teaching-as-research The flow of information in a classroom is bi-directional: the
classroom is a place for students to learn, and for teachers to learn from them. By applying
the scientific method and evidence-based approaches to teaching, learning goals can be
evaluated and iterated upon in order to enhance student learning. As a scientist, I do no
less than apply the same rigor to my teaching as I do to my research. In practice, I have
applied this approach to teaching by working with a course instructor to analyze responses
for a midterm and final exam from a large upper level ecology course. We investigated the
willingness and ability of advanced science undergraduates to use graphical
representations (e.g. x-y scatter plots, multidimensional ordinations, and concept maps) to
answer complex, real-world ecological problems. We found that the less than half of the
students voluntarily used a graph to supplement their responses, when given the option.
Learners that did optionally use graphs to answer the questions tended to be overall higher
performers in the course. We were surprised to find that students did not prefer to use
more space to answer the questions (the limits of time on student responses did not seem
to be an issue, either; in other words, no students were needed more time to complete the
4
exams than was allowed). The research reinforced my own understanding that frequent
application of a new skill (i.e. representing data visually) is essential for improving it. Our
results led to an increased emphasis by the course instructor in subsequent semesters on
graph interpretation, criticism, and creation, as one goal of the department is to produce
competent science graduates. More details of the design and results of this research can be
found in my Internship Reflection, below. Though I have not yet had the opportunity to
apply the findings of this research to a course curriculum of my own, I hope to be able to do
so in the future.
Real-world problem solving Just as enthusiasm can be a catalyst for learners’ engagement,
real-world problem solving can bridge the gap from abstraction to understanding. I believe
that for many learners, real-world application of concepts brings a higher level of cognition
by making subject matter more relevant. I have applied this principle by developing a 3lecture instructional module for an introductory environmental engineering course.
Initially, we addressed the challenge of teaching about ecological processes with dynamics
occurring beyond the scale of human observation (i.e. very short or very long processes, or
very large or very small processes). We used both high- and low-frequency water quality
measurements to teach water quality concepts. We iterated upon the materials with a
learning community of fellow UW graduate students and instructors simultaneously
developing instructional materials for other courses, with a community of high-school
science teachers who were interested in using the materials in their classrooms, and finally
with a UW Environmental Engineering instructor and her teaching assistant, in whose class
I guest taught for 3 semesters. Students were generally interested in the material and
displayed curiosity by asking follow up questions both in during the lecture and following it.
One issue I encountered during these lectures was that the material seemed too challenging
for some students (i.e. learning goals were not met), but too simple for others. This
challenge remains unaddressed in the instructional materials, but is something I hope to
improve upon in future iterations.
I believe that all learners possess an innate curiosity about their surroundings, though the
extent of curiosity is diverse, and that teachers can connect with learners through real
world examples. Additionally, I believe it is valuable for undergraduate learners to be
exposed to real-world data and problem solving exercises, in order to prepare them for the
future and to expand their perspective on what scientists do as disciplinary practitioners.
Some of the ‘real world’ data presented for the lecture were noisy and initially confusing to
some learners, but we used this as an opportunity to introduce learners to environmental
data that scientists encounter and have the responsibility of making sense of. This topic is
explored in greater detail in the Instructional Materials Development Reflection, below.
Hands-on experience Because individuals’ learning styles are diverse, I believe that the use
5
of multiple types of experiences (reading/writing, audio, visual, and kinesthetic) in the
classroom helps to serve a broader base of learners in more meaningful ways. In the UW
Informal Science Education (Journalism 880) course, I helped to create a tabletop exhibit
that explained and demonstrated the optical phenomenon of mirages. We began by
surveying a multi-generational public audience on pre-conceptions about mirages and
understanding of the underlying physical properties and processes that underlie the optical
phenomenon (e.g. density, and the ability of light to bend). Based on our findings from the
pre-survey, we created an exhibit that emphasized the physical experience firsthand
observation of a mirage, the cognitive experience of understanding that mirages are an
optical phenomenon caused by physical processes, and we also tried to inspire an affective
experience of enjoyment upon interacting with the exhibit. Our exhibit was presented at
two public forums in 2009: UW Science Expeditions and at the Museum of Science and
Industry, in Chicago. Most exhibit visitors were interested in talking about what mirages
really are, seeing photos of optical phenomenon, and in seeing a mirage firsthand. Several
reported that interest in the topic drew them to interacting with the exhibit, and there
were many ‘aha’ moments for visitors. Additional details can be found in the Informal
Science Education Reflection, below. In the classroom, laboratory exercises, fieldwork, data
analysis, and independent research provide students with hands-on experience and can
also be used to teach practical skills. The best-prepared students will graduate with handson experience in their field of study, preparing them for future occupations.
For the lake water quality instructional materials described above, we brought a dissolved
oxygen sensor of the type deployed in instrumented buoy to class, so that learners could
see, touch, and use a sensor of the type that collected data for the exercises. This was a very
popular facet of the materials, and also gave a great opportunity to teach about gas
solubility as a function of temperature. This
Conclusion My experience and knowledge guide my interactions with learners. I approach
teaching, mentoring, and research as iterative processes, and seek to serve the diversity of
learners that I encounter. As a citizen of an academic community, and as a teacher, mentor,
and collaborator, I strive to bring positivity, humanity, curiosity, and rigor to my work.
6
3. Curriculum Vitae- Emily Kara
Education
PhD Environmental Engineering, Expected June 2012
University of Wisconsin- Madison, WI
Master of Science in Environmental Science, 2007
Indiana University- Bloomington, IN
Bachelor of Science, Environmental Science, 2004
University of Arizona- Tucson, AZ
Academic appointments and relevant employment
2007-2012
Research Assistant
University of Wisconsin-Madison: McMahon Lab Supervisor:
Katherine D. McMahon, Madison, WI
2006-2007
Assistant Teaching Instructor
Limnology and Stream Ecology Lectures /Field Courses: Indiana
University, Bloomington, Indiana. Directed graduate and
undergraduate students in chemical analysis of nutrients, water
quality, and assessment of lake and stream biota. Supervisor: William
J. Jones, Bloomington, IN
2005-2006
Laboratory and Field Technician
Indiana Clean Lakes Program: Indiana University. Conducted
chemical water quality analysis using standard laboratory methods
and QA/QC. Supervisor: Melissa Clark, Bloomington, IN
2002-2003
Laboratory Assistant
University of Arizona Entomology Department: Carriere Laboratory
Supervisor: Yves Carriere, Tucson, AZ
Publications
Kara, E.L., Hanson, P., Hamilton, D., Hipsey, M.R., McMahon, K.D., Read, J.S., Winslow,
L., Dedrick, J., Rose, K., Carey, C.C., Bertilsson, S., da Motta Marques, D., Beversdorf, L.,
Miller, T., Wu, C., Hsieh, Y.-F., Gaiser, E., Kratz, T., 2012. Time-scale dependence in
numerical simulations: Assessment of physical, chemical, and biological predictions
in a stratified lake at temporal scales of hours to months. Environmental Modelling
& Software 35: 104-121. doi: 10.1016/j.envsoft.2012.02.014
7
Carey, C. C., Hanson, P. C., Bruesewitz, D. A., Holtgrieve, G. W., Kara, E. L., Rose, K. C.,
Smyth, R. L., & Weathers, K. C. 2012. Organized Oral Session 43: Novel Applications
of High-Frequency Sensor Data in Aquatic Ecosystems: Discoveries from GLEON, the
Global Lake Ecological Observatory Network. Bulletin of the Ecological Society of
America, 93, 100-105, doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1890/0012-9623-93.1.100.
Kara, E., C. Heimerl, T. Killpack, M. Van de Bogert, H. Yoshida, and S. R. Carpenter.
2012. Assessing a decade of phosphorus management in the Lake Mendota,
Wisconsin watershed and scenarios for enhanced phosphorus management. Aquatic
Sciences 74(2):241-253. doi: 10.1007/s00027-011-0215-6.
Hanson, P., D. Hamilton, E. Stanley, N. Preston, O. Langman, and E. Kara. 2011.
Nature of the Load Versus Nature of the Lake in Determining the Fate of
Allochthonous Dissolved Organic Carbon. PLoS ONE 6(7): e21884. DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0021884
Shade, A., C.C. Carey, E. Kara, S. Bertilsson, K.D. McMahon, and M. Smith. 2009. Can
the black box be cracked? The augmentation of microbial ecology with highresolution, automated sensing technologies. ISME Journal. 3:881-888
Kara, E. and A. Shade. 2009. Temporal dynamics of South End tidal creek bacterial
communities, Sapelo Island, Georgia. Applied and Environmental Microbiology.
75:1058-1064.
Kara, E. 2006. Funneling: A Threat to Indiana’s Lakes. Water Column, Vol.18 No.1:
1-2.
In Review
Rose K. C., L. A. Winslow, J. S. Read, E. L. Kara, C. Solomon, R. Adrian, P. C. Hanson.
Understanding variability in ecosystem metabolism measurements: The important
role of physics.
In Preparation
Kara, E., L. A. Winslow, Y. H. Hu, P. Hanson, and K.D. McMahon. Season controls
diversity and network complexity for aquatic bacterioplankton communities in a 10year time series.
Kara, E., K.D. McMahon, M. Ivancic, B. Cade-Menun, and T. Zhang. Dissolved organic
phosphorus speciation and dynamics in a eutrophic lake.
Hawley, J., E. Kara, K.D. McMahon, P. C. Hanson. Effects of climate change scenarios
on cyanobacterial biomass in a eutrophic lake
8
Society memberships
Water Environment Federation (WEF)
American Society for Limnology and Oceanography (ASLO)
Ecological Society of America (ESA)
Global Lake Ecological Observatory Network (GLEON)
Invited lectures, teaching, and outreach
University of Quebec at Montreal Aquatic Ecology Seminar: invited speaker. January,
2012. “Long term microbial community network structure and ecological coherence
in Lake Mendota, Wisconsin, USA.”
University of Wisconsin Center for Limnology, Winter Limnology Outreach, Winter
2010. “Microbes, nutrients, and food webs.”
Intro to Environmental Engineering 320, University of Wisconsin-Madison Civil and
Environmental Engineering. Guest Lecture, 2008, 2009, and 2011. “Using highfrequency data to understand lake ecosystem processes.”
Leadership and professional development
2010- pres
Steering Committee member, Global Lake Ecological Observatory
Network RCN
2008-2011
Graduate Student Association Co-Chair Global Lake Ecological
Observatory Network (GLEON). Organize student workshops for
international conference.
2008-pres
UW Center for the Integration of Research, Teaching, and Learning
(CIRTL) Internship and Certification Program
Referee for
PLoS One Journal
Proficiencies
Basic MATLAB proficiency including file I/O, writing data analysis scripts and
functions, and plotting.
Awards
9
University of Arizona Merit Scholarship, 2000
Becker Travel Grant 2009, 2010, 2011
Anna Grant Birge Memorial Award 2009, 2010, 2011
Student mentees
Aaron Besaw 2008, 2011, 2012
Kathryn Van Gheem 2009, 2010, 2011
Wai Yin 2010
James Mutschler 2011, 2012
Selected presentations and posters
Kara, E. and K.D. McMahon. 2011. “Long-term bacterial community composition in
eutrophic Lake Mendota, WI.” Global Lake Ecological Observatory Network 12.
Sunnape, New Hampshire. Poster.
Kara, E., P. Hanson, D. Hamilton, M. Hipsey, K.D. McMahon, J. Read, L. Winslow, J.
Dedrick, K. Rose, C. Carey, S. Bertilsson, D. D. M. Marques, L. Beversdorf, T. Miller, C.
Wu, Y. Hsieh, E. Gaiser, and T. Kratz. 2010. “Scale-dependence of numerical
simulation prediction accuracy for manual and high-frequency observations.”
University of Wisconsin Limnology and Marine Science Seminar. Oral presentation.
Kara, E., P.Hanson, D. Hamilton, M. Hipsey, K.D. McMahon, J. Read, L. Winslow, J.
Dedrick, K. Rose, C. Carey, S. Bertilsson, D. D. M. Marques, L. Beversdorf, T. Miller, C.
Wu, Y. Hsieh, E. Gaiser, and T. Kratz. 2010. Time-scale dependence in numerical
simulations: Assessment of physical, chemical, and biological predictions in a
stratified lake at temporal scales of hours to months.” American Society for
Limnology and Oceanography/North American Benthological Society Joint Meeting,
Santa Fe, NM. Oral presentation.
K.C. Rose, L. Winslow, J. Read, E. Kara, and C. Solomon. 2010. “Metabolic model
parameter uncertainty explained by GLEON Lake Analyzer stability indices.” Global
Lake Ecological Observatory Network 11. Nanjing, China. Poster.
Kara, E. October 2009. “Modeling Lake Mendota: GLAMMR.” Global Lake Ecological
Observatory Network 9. Boulder Junction, WI. Oral presentation.
Kara, E. October. 2009. “Spatial and Temporal Microbial Phosphorus Uptake and
Heterotrophic Bacterial Dynamics in Lake Mendota, WI.” Global Lake Ecological
Observatory Network 9. Boulder Junction, WI. Poster.
Kara, E. May, 2009. “Phosphorus uptake and release by sediment and pelagic lake
bacteria.” University of Wisconsin Environmental Engineering Seminar. Oral
presentation.
10
Kara, E. 2009. “Spatial and Temporal Microbial Phosphorus Uptake and
Heterotrophic Bacterial Dynamics in Lake Mendota, WI.” Long Term Ecological
Research All Scientists Meeting. Estes Park, CO. Poster.
Kara, E., A. Shade, and R. Bohanan. 2008. “Using an online real-time database to
teach about ecological scale and dynamics.” Global Lakes Ecological Observatory
Network 7. Uppsala, Sweden. Poster.
Kara, E. 2008. “Phosphorus Accumulating Bacteria in Aquatic Environments”
International Microbial Community Dynamics Workshop. Stockholm, Sweden. Oral
presentation.
11
4. Emily Kara- Informal Science Education Reflection
Background
In the spring of 2008, two graduate students and I created an interactive exhibit for
the University of Wisconsin-Madison’s Informal Science Education course, Journalism 880.
The mirage tabletop interactive exhibit was developed based on our anecdotal observation
that many people experience optical phenomena, such as mirages, but may never
understand what processes cause them. The goal of the exhibit was for visitors to
physically manipulate and interact with a tabletop mirage, to be exposed to an explanation
of the physical phenomenon including familiarization with the concept of density and
bending light, and to address preconceived notions about mirages.
A mirage is a type of refraction phenomenon that makes an object appear to be
displaced from its true position. Mirages are created by rays of light bending as they pass
through air or liquid of different densities, which usually result from sharp temperature
differences in a column of air or water. An object that appears higher than its actual
position is called a superior mirage, and when it appears lower than its actual position, it is
called an inferior mirage.
An inferior mirage is the type that most people associate with the word mirage. An
example of an inferior mirage would be the wet surface that can be seen on an asphalt road
during a hot summer day (Artifact 1, Figure1). Cars in the distance appear to swim in these
“puddles,” yet as we approach them they seem to disappear. In this example, the sun heats
the asphalt and the asphalt heats the layer of air directly above it, which creates an
environment where extremely warm air sits below slightly cooler air. These watery
puddles are the result of light from the blue sky refracting, or “bending,” upward to hit our
eye from below, creating the appearance of a puddle. The type of environment needed to
create an inferior mirage can be replicated on a smaller scale using common items such as a
cookie sheet and a flame, or by combining two immiscible liquids of different densities.
Implementation
Prior to creating the exhibit to teach about the optical phenomenon, we needed to
learn about the preconceived notions that the viewer brings with them about the
conditions necessary for a mirage to form. In order to do so, we surveyed ~ 200 individuals,
from junior high age to over 40 years old, on what mirages are, how and why they form,
and whether they are real or imagined. Based on these results (details shown in Appendix
1), we set out to create an exhibit with which a visitor could meet the following objectives:
1. Physical - manipulating the exhibit
 Observes beaker of water/oil with ruler and “light bending”
 Observes ordinary drinking glass with straw and “light bending”
 Observes oddly shaped glasses that deform an image
12

Observes tabletop mirage
2. Cognitive - understanding the concept
 Be introduced to the concept of a mirage (perhaps the visitor does not realize
they may have seen one before)
 Understand what is causing a mirage
 Familiarize the visitors with the concept of light bending
 Address the preconceived notions the viewer brings with them about the
conditions/environment necessary for a mirage to form
 Drawing/Cartoon of light waves involved in a mirage
 Photographs of other common mirages, e.g. “wet” road surface
3. Affective - developing an interest and/or positive attitude
 Interest in learning more about mirages through resources provided
 Enjoys seeing mirages, light being bent
 Relates concepts learned to past experiences or potential future experiences
We created a tabletop exhibit with two inferior mirages, both of which were formed
by sharp density gradients in gas (heated air adjacent to room temperature air, see Figure
A.3 for schematic and Figure A.4 for exhibit setup) or liquid (oil laying upon a layer of
water). After construction and a test-run with our classmates, we took our tabletop
demonstration to Science Expeditions at the University of Wisconsin-Madison for a threehour session on April 5, 2008 (~125 exhibit visitors interacted with our exhibit, mainly
families with grade K-5 visitors), and to the Museum of Science and Industry in Chicago for
two and a half hour session on April 26, 2008 (~ 75 exhibit visitors interacted with the
exhibit, mainly grade 6-12 visitors). See Appendix Figures 5 and 6 for photos of the exhibit.
At both events, we observed visitors and, for a subset, interviewed visitors following
interaction with the exhibit. We also surveyed non-attending persons that did not interact
with the exhibit at all. From the surveys, we aimed to learn what attracted visitors to it,
what they liked and disliked about the exhibit, how they knew how to use the exhibit. From
non-attending respondents, we asked about interest in the exhibit and what could be done
to make it more appealing. At Science Expeditions (n=8 interviews of visitors post use, n=2
of non-attending persons), our results indicated that most individuals found this exhibit
interesting and the demonstrations helpful for understanding the concepts presented (See
Appendix 1 for additional details). Some individuals found the quantity of objects and signs
on the table to be unappealing, while others like having options in what to engage
with. Because Science Expeditions was very densely visited, at times it was impossible for
a group member to lead an individual or group of users through the entire exhibit. We
determined that the placement of tabletop objects was an issue that needed to be
addressed before the exhibit was presented at the Museum of Science and Industry. The
need for extra space and de-cluttering was addressed by requesting an extra table for the
exhibit, allowing for objects on the table to be grouped by relevance. This grouping created
13
a more coherent order and placement of signs on the tabletop at the Museum of Science
and Industry.
At the Museum of Science and Industry (n=5 interviews of visitors post use, n=3 nonattending persons), we found that exhibit users surveyed were satisfied in general with the
exhibit and the level of interaction. Materials issues, such as the protective plexiglass in
front of the inferior mirage, made it hard for some visitors to visualize this part of the
exhibit. Other users recommended bigger texts, louder colors, and more and larger signage
for the visual part of the exhibit. Overall, most visitors commented positively on the
connection between the physical demonstrations and scientific explanation, citing these
aspects as what they most liked about their interaction with the tabletop.
Visitors interviewed after interaction with the exhibit indicated an understanding
that the exhibit topic mirages, how light moves, and the scientific explanation of mirages
(versus associating mirages as ‘myth’ or ‘hallucination’). Visitors learned salient points of
the exhibit, including the difference between superior and inferior mirages and that air
density differences in the vertical direction cause mirages. Seven out of eight visitors
reported liking the exhibit based on the topic and the demonstration.
‘Intriguing topic’
‘The demonstration, it was simple’
‘Good examples and pictures’
‘Heat distortion was very visible and easy to make the connection’
There were several comments suggesting that more signage at the exhibit and throughout
the museum, for the tabletop, would be helpful for other users.
‘… the text on the table was too small, so I would have to get close to read it’
‘Too much on the table’
One visitor suggested that the ergonomic design of the exhibit be adjusted so that it was
comfortable for tall people.
Considering the data collected while observing interacting visitors, post-use
interviews, and external recommendations, the mirage tabletop exhibit was a success. The
majority of visitors who attended the exhibit manipulated the tabletop successfully.
Families most commonly approached the tabletop at both venues. However, older children
and teenagers interacted with the exhibit at the Museum of Science and Industry than at
Science Expeditions. It was generally observed that high school students showed the most
14
enthusiasm about the exhibit. There, six of six post-use visitors commented positively that
they like the following aspects of the exhibit:
‘It was good. Without actually having a mirage (to see) it is hard to explain one’
‘Good explaining and demonstrations. Its familiar’.
‘Demonstrations, knowledgeable (student exhibit presenters), engaging, (I liked) working
with you’
Several recommendations were made for improving future use of the exhibit. Larger signs
with larger print would be made.
‘…how about bigger text …. I use reading glasses’
‘ (Protective) plastic in front of mirage made it hard to see’
Conclusion
Raising the demonstrations so that more adults can view the mirages while sitting
and providing a short step-stool for young children to stand on would solve an ergonomic
challenge of the visitor viewing the mirage at eye level. General observation has shown that
young children do not engage with the exhibit as fully as older children, teenagers, and
adults. In fact, it is often the adults of families with small children who choose to engage
with the interactive. If this interactive were presented at a venue aimed exclusively at
children, the focus of the exhibit would be shifted from the mirage mechanism to explaining
the fundamentals necessary for understanding the mechanism, such as density and
bending light.
The general implications of this exercise are 1) people like to be able to observe
optical phenomenon in controlled settings (not just when they happen to occur in the real
world), 2) aesthetics of exhibit can draw people in or drive them away: careful and
intentional planning of colors and placement of exhibit materials should be done, and 3)
interest in the topic seemed to be age-dependent: make sure the topic is of interest to your
audience if you truly want them to be engaged. All of these implications can be extended to
the classroom.
15
Emily Kara- Artifact 1: Mirage tabletop exhibit
A1.1 Introduction
In the spring of 2008, two graduate students and I set out to create a tabletop
exhibit that set out to address preconceived notion about the optical phenomenon of
mirage (Figure 1). Mirages are created by the bending (refraction) of light as it passes
through layers of gas or liquid of different densities. Inferior mirages are created by a
gas/liquid of higher density sitting atop a gas/liquid of lower density, causing light to be
bent down and then back up towards a viewers’ eye. Mirages are commonly associated as
mythological or caused by hallucination (i.e. seeing an object that is not actually there).
Many sources of mis-conceptions arise from popular cultures depiction of ‘desert oases’
that trick a thirsty person into wandering further into the desert.
Many people associate mirages with heat, sand, deserts, myth, and imagination.
However, mirages are an optical phenomenon that can be explained by the physical
properties of light and the density of air or liquid through which it passes. For our work, we
set out to 1) determine pre-conceived notions about mirages; 2) create and iterate upon a
table top exhibit that allowed users to observe an learn about the optical phenomenon; and
3) assess the efficacy of the exhibit in meeting the objectives of (2).
Figure 1. An inferior mirage on a road surface, creating a wet appearance that
disappears upon approach. Inferior mirages are created by refraction (bending) of
light that causes objects to appear to be lower than their actual position. In the case
above, car tires, signposts, and forest are refracted below their actual position,
resembling the appearance of reflection of light off of a wet surface.
16
A1.2 Front-end survey of preconceived notions and understanding of mirage
The following questions comprised a front-end formative survey, used to create formative
program objectives for Mirage tabletop exhibit. We questioned a cross-generational
general public group of ~ 200 respondents about mirages, the underlying physical
principles that allow them occur, and on interest in learning more about a mirage. The
questions used are:
1. What do you think of when you first hear the word “mirage”?
2. Have you seen a mirage? If so, describe it. (Feel free to draw a picture)
3. Check the answer that you think best completes this sentence. A mirage is _____
_____ a hallucination brought on by stress or exhaustion.
_____ an illusion that occurs when the brain can not process what the eyes see.
_____ a physical event caused by certain conditions in the atmosphere.
_____ a myth and does not actually happen in the real world.
4. What happens when air is heated? It sinks / It rises / Nothing
5. Do you think that it would be possible to bend light? Yes / No
6. Would you be interested in learning about mirages? Yes / No
7. Would you visit a museum exhibit that creates a real mirage? Yes / No / Maybe
8. Age?
A1.2 Front-end survey results
Below are the quantitative and qualitative results of ~ 200 survey respondents. Overall, we
found that many (~25-50%) of respondents associate mirages with hallucinations or with
the perception of physical objects that do not exist. Of these, many respondents associated
mirages with deserts, oases, sand, and heat. The remaining respondents understood that
mirage was an optical phenomenon created by physical conditions. Most respondents
understood the physical principles behind mirages (e.g. hot air less dense than cold air,
light can bend), when questioned about them outside of the context of the word ‘mirage’.
About half of respondents were interested in learning more about mirages.
1. Wednesday Night at the Lab (2/27/08, n=8). Wednesday Night at the Lab is a
weekly lecture series open to the public covering a wide range of topics. Six of eight
individuals surveyed were age 40 or older, had received higher education degrees
(bachelor and doctoral degrees), and had good understanding of optical phenomenon.
They all understood that mirages were caused by physical conditions. Two
individuals, aged 21-25, considered mirages to be hallucinations, not caused by
17
physical events. All eight respondents knew that light can be bent and that warm air
rises. With the exception of the two younger individuals, this group seemed to be predisposed to having an interest in and a good understanding of physical laws such as
those governing optical phenomena. We expect that age and inclination for informal
science education may be the cause of more accurate understanding of optical
phenomenon than other groups.
2. Online survey results (2/08-3/08, n=12). Nine of twelve individuals surveyed had
attained or were in the process of attaining bachelor’s or more advanced degrees.
Eight of ten respondents had incorrect notions of the causes of mirages (“A mirage is
an illusion that occurs when the brain cannot process what the eyes see”), four held
correct understandings of the causes of mirages (“A mirage is a physical event caused
by certain conditions in the atmosphere”). All ten respondents knew that light can be
bent and that warm air rises. All twelve respondents were under 40, ten were under
30. This relatively younger group had more misconceptions about optical
phenomenon than did the Wednesday Night at the Lab group.
3. Introductory Weather and Climate Course (3/08, n=52) This group contained 52
University of Wisconsin undergraduate students in a 100 level introductory course in
the department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences, with ages ranging from 18 to
23. These students were surveyed prior learning about refraction of light and
buoyancy in the course, however, they had already been introduced to the concept of
density of air and the composition of air.
The answers to question 2 (Have you seen a mirage? If so, describe it.) allowed for a
useful categorization of the student based on their responses, 27 students answered
“no,” 18 students answered “yes,” and 8 answered “I don't know” or “maybe.”
Of the 27 students that responded that they had never seen a mirage, twelve
answered question 1 (What do you think of when you first hear the word “mirage”?)
by describing “illusions” or “seeing something that is not really there” and fifteen
answered by describing “desert” scenes. These included descriptions of palm trees,
oasis pools, sand, heat, exhaustion, and two references to TV or movies.
Of the 28 students that have seen a mirage, sixteen described seeing a real mirage,
wet/watery appearance of road surfaces on a hot day, and 2 students gave incorrect
descriptions of a mirage, such as illusions seen in magic shows. Of the sixteen
students that described a wet/watery road surface mirage, six answered question 1
by describing a wet/watery looking road surface similar to the description they gave
in question 2. Four of the sixteen students answered question 1 by describing a
18
“desert” scene, even though the description of the mirage they have seen was
different. Three students of the sixteen answered question 1 with “an illusion” or
“seeing something that is not really there” while described seeing a mirage on a
roadway during a hot summer day in question 2. Two students gave a description of
the physical process that makes a mirage.
Five of the eight students that were unsure if they had seen a mirage responded to
question 1 with “seeing something that isn't really there,” while three of the eight
described something you see in a desert.
Roughly 50% of all the students (26) responded to question 1 (What do you think of
when you first hear the word “mirage”?) with answers similar to “seeing something
that is not really there” or “an illusion.” The next largest category of responses (20)
related to “desert” scenes. These included descriptions of palm trees, oasis pools,
sand, heat, exhaustion, and two references to TV or movies. The last group (6)
described an actual mirage, the watery/wet looking surface over a road on a hot day,
this group consisted of students that had all previously seen mirages.
Continuing with the use of categories of students who had seen, had not seen, and
maybe had seen a mirage, the responses to questions 3-5 were as follows. Fourteen
of the sixteen students that seen a real mirage described a mirage as a physical event
created by atmospheric conditions. Of these eighteen, all but one knew that air rises
when it is heated and that light can bend. These responses suggests that those who
realize they have seen a mirage have some concept of the processes occurring to
produce the mirage.
Half (fourteen) of the twenty-seven students that said they have not seen a mirage
said that a mirage is a hallucination, while six described a mirage is an illusion, six
others described a mirage is a physical event, and one said a mirage is a myth. Of
these twenty-seven students, all but one knew that light can bend and all but three
knew that air rises when it is heated. These responses suggest that the connection
between the physical/sensible conditions in the atmosphere that create a mirage and
seeing a mirage have not been made. At the exhibit, addressing the prior notion that a
mirage is a hallucination or an illusion will have to take place with individuals that
say they have not seen a mirage.
All of the eight students that were uncertain (I don't know/maybe) if they had seen a
mirage knew that light can bend and that air rises when heated. Of these eight, four
believe a mirage is an illusion, two described a mirage as a physical event and two
described a mirage as a hallucination. Again, addressing the prior notion that a
19
mirage is a hallucination or an illusion will have to take place with individuals who
are not sure if they have seen a mirage.
Of all the fifty-two that took the survey, thirty-seven are interested in learning more
about mirages. When asked if they would visit a museum exhibit about mirages,
thirty-two said they would seventeen others said maybe. There is an interest in the
topic from those who have seen and have not seen a mirage.
4. Blessed Sacrament Middle School (3/08, n=60). Thirty 7th grade and thirty 8th
grade students were surveyed in this group. Forty-one students answered that a
mirage is a hallucination or an illusion. Of these 8 described a true mirage and 28
students said that they had never seen one. Fifteen students answered that a mirage
is an physical event caused by atmospheric conditions. Of these, 6 described a true
mirage, while 6 said that they had never witnessed a mirage. Six students spread
across both categories claimed that they had seen a mirage, but did not describe a
true mirage. Answers to number 1, (What do you first think of when you hear the
word “mirage?”) suggest that many students associate mirages with an object that is
seen, but does not actually exist. Many mentioned heat, but few mentioned deserts.
Forty-nine students understood that heated air rises, while 3 did not. Fifty-six
students said that it is possible to bend light and 4 said that it is not possible.
Four students were not interested in learning more about mirages, but only 2 said
that they would not visit a museum exhibit about mirages.
A1.3 Formative program objectives
Based on the survey results, we identified the following program objectives that we aimed
for the visitors to our exhibit to achieve.
1. Physical - manipulating the exhibit
 Observes beaker of water/oil with ruler and “light bending”
 Observes ordinary drinking glass with straw and “light bending”
 Observes oddly shaped glasses that deform an image
 Observes tabletop mirage
2. Cognitive - understanding the concept
 Be introduced to the concept of a mirage (perhaps the visitor does not realize
they may have seen one before)
 Understand what is causing a mirage
 Familiarize the visitors with the concept of light bending
20



Address the preconceived notions the viewer brings with them about the
conditions/environment necessary for a mirage to form
Drawing/Cartoon of light waves involved in a mirage
Photographs of other common mirages, e.g. “wet” road surface
3. Affective - developing an interest and/or positive attitude
 Interest in learning more about mirages through resources provided
 Enjoys seeing mirages, light being bent
 Relates concepts learned to past experiences or potential future experiences
Figure 2. Diagram of mirage viewing station.
21
Figure 3. Photo of tabletop mirage viewing station used at exhibit. Lattice placed
behind horizontal metal plate appears to be stretched vertically just above that
surface- that is the optical phenomenon we sought to explain to visitors.
22
Figure 4. 'Mirage' tabletop exhibit presented at UW Science Expeditions, April 2008.
23
5. Emily Kara- Instructional Materials Development Reflection
Background- EPD 690
In 2009, Ashley Shade (fellow graduate student), Robert Bohanan (advisor) and I
came together for Delta’s Instructional Materials Development course, EPD 690. The
teaching challenge that we aimed to address was the difficulty of teaching ecological
concepts that act on scales beyond the capacity of human observation. We aimed to
overcome this challenge by using high-frequency observations to teach about lake
ecosystem processes: metabolism, gas exchange, and productivity. These processes change
on spatial and temporal scales that are impossible to observe without instruments and/or
long-term records. We theorized that ecosystem concepts occurring at scales outside of
human perception are a barrier to understanding of ecosystem dynamics.
To begin with, we started with a literature search to see if previous studies had
addressed challenges like those Robert Bohanan had observed among ZOO 152 students- in
that very long or short term dynamics, or very small or very large scale processes, can be
difficult to perceive. Our literature search indicated that very little has been done with
respect to issues of perception of change at small and large (or short and long) scales, so
our methods were creative and intuitive, rather than based on others’ work. We used
backwards design, together with our learning outcomes and elements we knew we wanted
to incorporate (e.g. real-time water quality sensor database, gleon.org), to create
components of the learning module.
The importance of considering the diversity of learning styles (aural, kinesthetic,
reading/writing, and visual), was considered in the compilation of learning tools and
techniques utilized in the module. We used a short podcast (aural), a printed newspaper
article (reading), Frayer diagram (writing), graphical data interpretation and graph and
concept map creation (visual), and an exercise in which learners queried a database to
answer questions about aquatic ecosystem gas exchange and metabolism (kinesthetic). We
used both individual in-class exercises and group exercises. We recognized that we needed
to prepare for less-visible diversity among our learners. Some examples include
background (Have learners have spent time on lakes? Are learners familiar with high
frequency data? Have learners ever queried a database?). This awareness guided our
methods and choices for what elements to include in the instructional materials, including
with respect to presenting ample background and clear instructions for database query
homework exercise (see Appendix 2 for a poster summary of coursework).
Because we intended the course materials to be flexible and implemented in high
school or college classrooms, we held two workshops with area high school science
teachers to get feedback and assessment of learning outcomes. During the workshops, the
teachers played the role of learners, which allowed for iteration and improvement of the
materials. Our results indicated that the materials helped some learners, but not all,
achieve many of the desired learning outcomes. We know this based on our summative
24
assessment that indicated a wide variation in level of background the learners arrived at
the workshops. This represented a diversity that we attempted to correct for by starting
with foundational concepts. I imagine that this issue could be improved upon by utilizing
some students’ more advanced background on eutrophication. It seems that the more
background learners arrive with, the better they come away with, and I wonder what this
means for our instructional materials. It seems that the connection between dissolved
oxygen, productivity, and lake trophic status was not made by some learners during the
workshop. It would be beneficial to have some additional in class assessments to determine
how many students grasp the concepts ahead of time, so that if the majority of learners’ are
missing the point, it could be emphasized or taught in a different way. The community of
teachers that came together during our workshops were a very special kind of learning
community. The participants were individuals willing to spend a Saturday to learn about
our materials, and the feedback we got directly, and indirectly (through observing the
teachers as learners), was invaluable.
We tried to design the materials to be used in a flexible, adaptable manner. We
found that high school educators appreciated this flexible nature, and in fact would not use
the materials if they were not flexible. This flexibility would probably also be appreciated
by other UW faculty members, if they chose to use any of the materials.. For me, developing
materials flexibly (e.g. in a modular fashion) makes it easy to switch out exercises that
prove ineffective in the classroom.
During the semester in which the Instructional Materials Development course took
place, the Learning Community of our fellow participants was also a great resource, though
certainly distinct from the high school science teachers. By hearing about other groups’
teaching challenges at many different stages of development, and across many disciplines, I
was exposed to an incredible number of creative ways to teach. We also received ongoing
feedback from the group as we progressed, which helped us to rapidly iterate upon the
materials as we developed them. We incorporated several classroom assessment
techniques that were introduced during the course, which remain in the materials today
(Frayer diagram and concept map).
Implementation in a UW classroom
An additional outcome of the work was a modification of the materials that I
presented to UW Civil and Environmental Engineering Department CEE 320 (Introduction
to Environmental Engineering) course. I taught the materials in 2009, 2010, and 2011, and
it has been a learning experience for me on iterating through material on a semester-bysemester basis. Over time, and with the assistance of the course instructor and teaching
assistants (another distinct Learning Community for this project), we improved the
materials so that they interfaced better with relevant subject matter presented prior to the
guest lectures (Henry’s law was taught immediately prior). We also removed the Frayer
25
diagram exercise from the materials, because as it was placed in the lecture, there were 2
group activities in a row, which seemed like too much, based on observing students.
[Don: I have evaluations from the teaching I did in CEE 320 but have not yet analyzed them.
I plan to incorporate those data into this part of the reflection soon].
Conclusion…
26
Emily Kara- Artifact 2. Instructional materials development: High-frequency water
quality data to teach about aquatic ecosystem processes that occur at long temporal
scales
In 2008, I, together with a fellow graduate student and faculty advisor, set out to
generate instruction materials that would teach about aquatic ecosystem processes
occurring at scales beyond which humans can observe (long and short temporal scales). To
do so, we used high frequency water quality data from an instrumented buoy data on a
local lake (Figure 6), to teach about metabolism, gas exchange, and productivity in lakes.
We designed the materials to be flexible and iterative, so that teachers utilizing the material
could go into depth on topics as they chose. Our learning objectives included an
understanding of eutrophication, sources and sinks of oxygen in a lake, and how to
interpret high frequency data in the context of these concepts (Figure 7). We designed the
materials so that leaners could generate hypotheses and test them using the data at hand.
The instrumented buoy (Figure 6) is powered by solar panels that charge internal
batteries. (black rectangle on buoy is a solar panel). Meteorological sensors collect data (air
temperature, relative humidity, wind speed and direction, photosynthetically active
radiation) from sensors above the water, while water quality measurements (water
temperature at every meter from 0-20m, dissolved oxygen, pH, and chlorophyll and
phycocyanin fluorescence) are made by sensors suspended under water. Data are collected
at 1 minute intervals and are transmitted via radio frequency to a computer on shore,
where data are stored, and made publically available in real time at www.gleon.org.
An outline of the instructional materials can be seen in Figure 7, by following the
green spiral from the upper left hand corner to the lower right hand corner. We envisioned
that the materials could be used in any number of courses or classrooms, including UW
Biology 152 and in area classrooms. We began with an introduction to concepts including
eutrophication and productivity, followed by a Frayer diagram exercise and concept map
exercise (Figure 11 shows an example concept map from CEE 320 in 2011), in which
student were asked, both individually and in groups, to connect a list of relevant words and
concepts visually on paper. After that, students queried the database described above
(Figure 8). Finally, students were asked to view lake data, both high-frequency (Figure 9)
and manually sampled (Figure 10) to make hypotheses about the differences across lake
systems. The materials end with discussion of ways to test hypotheses, and could be
followed and expanded upon by testing those hypotheses, though time limited us from
making multiple iterations on this step of the materials.
I taught these instruction materials in CEE 320, Introduction to Environmental
Engineering course in 2008, 2009, and 2011, over two consecutive 50 minute lectures.
Powerpoint slides and homework and in-class documents can be found online at
kara.bact.wisc.edu.
27
Figure 5. Instrumented buoy on Lake Mendota from which instructional materials
data was based. Meteorological sensors can be seen at the top of the structure, while
water quality sensors are suspended below the surface of the water.
28
Figure 6 Poster summary of instructional materials framework. We created the materials to be interactive for instructors and learners,
such that hypotheses could be designed, tested, and iterated upon. Visit kara.bact.wisc.edu to find a high-resolution version.
29
Figure 7. Kinesthetic exercise for learners: Query real-time database for water
temperature on Lake Mendota during October, 2011.
30
Figure 8. High-frequency dissolved oxygen data from two lakes of different trophic
status (eutrophic above, oligotrophic below) used to exercise learners ability to
hypothesize on the cause of different dynamics
31
Figure 9. Manually-sampled low-frequency (biweekly) total phosphorus, total
nitrogen, and in vitro chlorophyll-a concentrations from two study lakes. Data were
used to help students test hypotheses about differences in lake data.
32
Figure 10. Example concept map generated by CEE 320 student during instructional
materials
33
6. Emily Kara- Delta Internship Reflection
The University of Wisconsin-Madison Zoology Department’s Ecology 460
curriculum regularly exercises students to interpret and generate graphical
representations (e.g. 2D (x-y) plots, multidimensional plots (ordinations), concept maps).
The majority of upper-level undergraduate ecology students opt out of use of graphical
representation to answer complex ecological question. In 2010, Robert Bohanan- an
Ecology 460 instructor- and I set out to investigate into the issue of students’ use of
graphical representations: We asked (1) what proportion of students created meaningful
graphical representations under voluntary or mandatory conditions on exams, and (2) how
overall course performance between the groups differed. I carried out our research
through the Delta Internship with Robert Bohanan as my advisor. Our interest was founded
on the belief that interpretation and evaluation of graphical representations of concepts
and data are critical to scientific research. Through analysis of midterm and final exams
and access to students’ grades, I found that most students opt out of using graphical
representations to answer complex ecological questions, and those that do so successfully
tend to be better overall performers in the course. More methodological details and results
can be found in Artifact #1: Graphical representations by upper level ecology students.
My teaching-as-research project was based on assessments (mid term and final
exams) that were collected in a 2009 Ecology 460 course, prior to the conception of our
research question. The most important teaching-as-research lesson I learned through my
internship was the value of well-constructed assessments and artifacts of learning, for
analysis after the fact. I was able to use midterm exam grades and final exam artifacts to
answer questions about the optional use of visual representations (e.g. graphs, plots, maps,
concept maps) by students. Our question grew organically out of the curriculum and by
observations made by Robert Bohanan, a course instructor, and because of carefully crafted
exams and large course enrollment; we were able to answer it using the assessments that
had already been collected as part of the course. This experience further proves that
teaching-as-research is much like research in science, whereby unexpected questions arise
and creative solutions for answering them may arrive after data has been collected.
In this work, Robert Bohanan represented a major component of my learning
community for the internship. As described above, the research questions and approach
evolved non-linearly, and that is a function of the way that my mentor and I interact, plan,
and execute. Our respective attitudes and expectations allowed the project to work out in
an unexpected but productive way. We get along well and work well together, and my
mentor was very engaged, available, and interested in the project. The primary Delta
instructor was engaged and interested in the work. This instructor, together with my
mentor, really kept me excited and positive about the work- that allowed me to persevere
and finish the internship.
Learning-through-diversity was implicitly integrated in our analysis of grades and
34
artifacts post-course. The intellectual and creative diversity of students whose assessments
I analyzed was evident through their grades and artifacts from the final exam. Because my
mentor taught the course in 2009 and knew the students whose coursework I was
analyzing, whereas I knew nothing about them, I was likely more able to objectively assess
a variety of responses without any prior knowledge or pre-conceptions of the students. The
overarching question for the project considered diversity of learning styles and ability to
represent complex ideas graphically, and thus, we remained open to a diversity of
responses on exam questions.
35
Emily Kara- Artifact 3: Design and Results of Teaching-As-Research
Ecology 460 curriculum regularly includes exercises where students are asked to
interpret and generate graphical representations (e.g. 2D (x-y) plots, multidimensional
plots (ordinations), concept maps). Majority of upper-level undergraduate ecology
students opt out of use of graphical representation to answer complex ecological question.
We wanted to investigate if these students’ performance was distinct from students who
chose to use graphical representations. Our interest is founded on the notion that
interpretation and evaluation of graphical representations of concepts and data are critical
to scientific research.
Our research questions included:
1) Did students who opt to use representation space on final exam score more points on
this question than those that do not opt to use the space?
2) How do scores differ between students that use meaningful representations, nonmeaningful representations, and opt for no representations?
Ecology 460 Fall 2008 course. While student were tracked in order to answer
research questions, student information was kept anonymous and not used for analysis of
data. Data sources included:
a. Exam 1 & 2 total scores
b. Final exam Q2- optional graphical representation, Q3- required graphical
c. representation, and total score
d. Lab final grade
e. Lecture final grade
f. Overall final grade
To assess data and answer questions, we used statistical tests of underlying data to
test for differences in non-normal categorical populations.
Results:
Did students who opt to use representation space on final exam do score more points?
a. For final exam question with graphical representation option, yes.
b. Overall, no.
c. For students who opted to generate meaningful representations, yes, on
Exam 2, Final Lecture Score, and Overall Grade.
36
How do scores as students progress through the course differ between students that use
meaningful representations, non-meaningful representations, and opt for no representations?
a.
b.
c.
Students that did not opt to use representations (NR) improved more than
those that did opt for representations (R) between Exam 2 and the Final
Exam.
Students that did not opt to use representations (NR) and those that used
non-meaningful representations (RNAC) improved more than those that
did opt for representations (RAC) between Exam 2 and the Final Exam.
For groupings of R vs. NR and RAC vs. NRAC & NR, the same trends were
observed
37
Figure 11. ECOL 460 final exam question from which data was collected. Box at
bottom of page indicates space within which students had the option to answer one
of either complex ecological question, shown above.
38
Figure 12. Example response of student who opted out of use of the graphical
representation space- categorized as 'No Representation' (NR).
39
Figure 13. Example of student who chose to use a representation to supplement
written answer- categorized as 'Representation' (R).
40
Figure 14. Examples of graphical representations judged to add content and meaning
beyond the written exam response. 'Representation with Added Content' (RAC).
41
Figure 15. Student exam responses where representations were used, but without
adding additional meaning or content beyond the written response. 'Representation
with No Added Content' (RNAC).
42
Figure 16. Paired boxplots of points received by Ecology 460 students who used
Representations with Added Content (RAC) versus Representations with No Added
Content (RNAC) and No Representation (NR).
43
Figure 17. Paired boxplots of points recieved by Ecology 460 stduents who used
Representations (R) versus No Representation (NR).
44
Figure 18. Comparison of paired boxplots of categories of R vs. NR, RNAC vs RAC, and
comparisons between students that chose to answer the Karner Blue Butterfly (KBB)
question versus the Salamander (S) question, and who used NR, RNAC, and RAC. We
determined that there was no difference in scoring across KBB vs. S respondents.
45
Portfolio Peer Review Feedback Form
Name of Peer Reviewer: Don Gillian-Daniel
Email of Peer Reviewer: dldaniel@wisc.edu
Name of Portfolio Author: Emily Kara
Criteria
Comments
Other Comments
 Overall a well written portfolio.
 My feedback is intended to help you make the document more reader
friendly in general and to better convey your understanding of the
pillars specifically.
 You’ve done some really cool things and this is your chance to show off
a little!
 Deciding what you include and your reasons for including it will be
important too, particularly for artifacts that are images. Consider – what
message/information do you want the reader to take from an image?
 Your teaching philosophy conveys that you are a mindful practitioner.
 Your 2nd reflection conveys more about how you went about creating an
instructional material and what you learned by using it. Add more here
to show me that you reflected on the experience and put it into the
larger context of how you teach.
 Your third reflection is the one place where you describe your
understanding of the pillars and it needs more content/text to convey
that.
 As a reader you have done a good job throughout the portfolio
convincing me that you have a reflective and intentional practice.
 Good use of examples in your teaching philosophy.
 Your first reflection does a nice job of conveying your use of teachingas-research in an informal education setting. You present TAR as natural
– of course you would survey people using your display to figure out if
they were learning. That’s great!
 Second reflection also conveys TAR well. This reflection mentions
learning communities and learning through diversity, but only a t a
superficial level, I would challenge you to write more about these
concepts to convey to the reader the depth of your understanding
about the concepts.
 Third reflection/artifact(s) – I recommend including your internship
summative report here. That will better showcase all of the work that
you did in the project.
Reflection on Teaching and
Learning Process
Implementation of Delta
Pillars
46
Organization
 Overall I felt that you needed to convey your depth of understanding of
Learning Communities and Learning through diversity better throughout
the document.
 Reading your portfolio I am certain that you know how to use TAR as a
process. But I don’t have a good sense of how you analyzed and
interpreted student learning data, and how that will inform your
instruction. (You do this some in your IMD reflection.) Including your
final version of your summative report will address that further.
 I like that you started with your philosophy. You connect your ideas in
your philosophy to your reflections.
 I would pair artifacts with reflections sequentially throughout the
document.
 You can work on the visual aspects of the document with headers,
introductory and explanatory text, summary paragraphs, etc. Page
numbers in the TOC. You want to make the document visually appealing
and user friendly.
 Some students write a separate reflection (brief) up front that describes
their understanding of the pillars. This then connects well with
discussion of the pillars throughout the document.
 Others will also discuss the layout of the document and why they
decided to do it that way, and include the materials that they did.
47