Slides from a workshop run [online] on behalf of colleagues within Biological Sciences at the University of Leicester (UK). One or two of the slides are specific to local context, but most are pertinent for anyone wanting to get started in educational research by looking to make evaluation of their existing or future teaching initiatives more robust.

1. BS-SOTL workshop (July 2020)
Turning teaching innovations into
education publications
Dr Chris Willmott
Dept of Molecular & Cell Biology
University of Leicester
cjrw2@le.ac.uk

2. • Advice for developing pedagogic publication portfolio
• Turning things you were doing anyway into publications
• Accounts sharing good practice = “quick wins”
• Illustrate using some of my experience
• Case study: a paper published elsewhere (Smith, 2016)
• Discuss ideas to get your own current/future teaching into shareable
format
Outline of session

3. • Education publications unlikely to be REFable
- education journals have low (or no) impact factor
- fall between “Bioscience” and “Education”
• “Proper” education research = as labour intensive (and quite possibly
takes longer to achieve) than bench science
• Turning things you were doing anyway into publications
• Career development
- evidence for CV
- internal promotion
- external accreditation
(e.g. (S)HEA Fellowships)
Why bother publishing education papers?
http://tinyurl.com/squarepeg1

4. Where to publish?
Mainstream
“Science” journal?
e.g. Science
Mainstream
“Education” journal?
e.g. Assessment &
Evaluation in HE
“Nursery” journal?
e.g. JLTHE?
JPAAP?
“Grey” literature?
e.g. blogs?
pre-prints?
“Science education”
literature?
e.g. Int Jnl Science Ed
“Disciplinary”
journal?
*Impact*
or
impact?
Jargon &/or
Theory?
Time to
publication?
Fees?

5. • Have more “impact” with colleagues within the discipline
• Willing to accept teaching innovation papers as well as more formal
education research
• “This worked well for me, it might help you too”
• Good place to start publication
• Contributing to a “Community of Practice”
Disciplinary (Bio-specific) journals

6. Bio-specific journals
BAMBED
www.bambed.org
Impact factor 0.924
Advances in Physiology Education
advan.physiology.org
Impact factor 1.534
CBE Life Science Education
www.lifescied.org
Impact factor 2.380
Journal of Biological Education
www.tandfonline.com/toc/rjbe20/current
Impact factor 0.764

7. International Journal of Science Education
https://www.tandfonline.com/toc/tsed20/current Impact factor 1.485
Journal of Science Education and Technology
https://www.springer.com/journal/10956 Impact factor 1.644
Studies in Higher Education
https://www.tandfonline.com/toc/cshe20/current Impact factor 3.000
Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education
https://www.tandfonline.com/toc/caeh20/current Impact factor 2.320
Computers & Education
https://www.journals.elsevier.com/computers-and-education Impact factor 5.296
Journal of Perspectives in Applied Academic Practice
https://jpaap.napier.ac.uk/index.php/JPAAP Impact factor n/a
Other options worth thinking about…

8. Illustrative examples
• Some examples, with “meta-narrative”

9. Tentative steps
• January 2000 - appointed lecturer
• Semester 1, Autumn 2000
• Year 1 Biochemistry lectures (n=5)
• Gone too fast, needed “filler”
• Amino Acid and Protein revision bingo

10. Revision bingo
5 x 5 grid (same for all)
Verbal clues
– multi-layered
e.g. “This next answer is an amino acid…
… it is unusual amongst the amino acids found in proteins as the side-
chain is actually bonded to the backbone nitrogen…
… because of this it has reduced flexibility and it is not usually found in
alpha helices…
… The single letter code for this amino acid is P”
KM Competitive Glutamate Zwitterion -sheet
Proline -helix Lineweaver-Burk Ornithine Kcat
Michaelis-Menten Cysteine Tyrosine Vmax Non-competitive
Tubulin Glycine -galactosidase Tryptophan Henderson-
Hasselbalch
Serine pK Lysine -mercaptoethanol Haemoglobin

11. Revision bingo KM Competitive Glutamate Zwitterion -sheet
Proline -helix Lineweaver-Burk Ornithine Kcat
Michaelis-Menten Cysteine Tyrosine Vmax Non-competitive
Tubulin Glycine -galactosidase Tryptophan Henderson-
Hasselbalch
Serine pK Lysine -mercaptoethanol Haemoglobin
All same game card
Objective:
revision > winning
- but offer small prize
Fun way of doing quick test
Flexible: - duration of a game
- number of participants
- content (adapted for different topics)
“Gamification” before I knew such a thing existed!

12. First HE Education paper
• Wrote up exercise
• Two elements: (i) Activity itself (‘off the shelf’)
(ii) Practical tips for adapting
• Published in BAMBED
• Note - descriptive,
no significant evaluation

13. • Two students identified as copying chunk from textbook
• Their defence – it had been cited in text so “ok”
• Many students are “accidental” plagiarists:
- Not understanding the rules
- Not enough time (poor time-keeping)
- Poor study skills
• Exercise to develop understanding
• Prevention better than cure,
better than confirmation of guilt
Plagiarism education
Nick Newman

14. • Worksheet: Study the paragraph, below, taken from Pharmacology (4th
edition, 1999) by Rang, Dale & Ritter.
During the last 60 years the development of effective and safe
drugs to deal with bacterial infections has revolutionised medical
treatment, and the morbidity and mortality from microbial disease
have been dramatically reduced.
• Look at seven essay extracts and decide whether or not you consider
the author is guilty of plagiarism.
Plagiarism education

15. Plagiarism education

16. • Exercise followed by tutor-led discussion of
appropriate and inappropriate use
• Leading into practical tips on avoidance of
accidental plagiarism
- advice on good note-taking practice
- advice on referencing
- warning re Turnitin
Plagiarism education

17. Willmott CJR and Harrison TM (2003) An exercise to teach
students about plagiarism Journal of Biological Education 37:139-140
Published in Journal of Biological Education

18. Why JBE?
Pragmatic: Had published in BAMBED, Bioscience Education [RIP] and
CBE-LSE did not yet exist
Intended audience: broader relevance - plagiarism is issue in
secondary as well as HE
Interactive Learning
section

19. Editor at JBE asked me to run workshop on plagiarism at Association for
Science Education conference
Timetabled against Patrick Moore
Audience n=1 (plus chair)
She was journalist for Times Educational
Supplement – wrote it up
4 months later she self-plagiarised in TES
Leicester Mercury picked it up
•Times Higher picked it up from Mercury
• Invited to write piece for Higher
Unexpected consequences (1)

20. Resonated with felt need elsewhere
Lots of emails of thanks +/or permission to adapt
(including other disciplines)
Not generating “citations” but evidence of impact
Colleague in student development turned it
into online self-study exercise
“Don’t Cheat Yourself”
(20 subjects)
Revised versions still available
https://tinyurl.com/DCY2020
Unexpected consequences (2)

21. • QAA Benchmarking statements (2nd Edition, 2007, p2):
“students should develop competence in comparing the merits of
alternative hypotheses and receive guidance in terms of how to
construct experiments or to make observations to challenge them”
• 50 minute introductory session for Year 1 students:
- Students watch short clip describing an experiment to investigate
whether you can smell if someone is afraid
- Having watched the clip, they discuss:
- what was good about the design of expt?
- what was wrong with the experiment?
Experimental design: Can you smell fear?
http://tinyurl.com/terrorface1

22. Brainiac Science Abuse: The Smell of Fear
Sky1, 07:00, 28th January 2009
(http://tinyurl.com/brainiacfear)
Experimental design: Can you smell fear?
After watching clip
- good and poor features shared
- asked to design better experiment
- talk through published paper on same theme with
rigorous methodology

23. • Paper offering the exercise “off the shelf” (slides downloadable via
Slideshare) and advice on running session
• Good idea, supported by some qualitative data, but not substantial
evaluation
Willmott CJR (2011) Introduction to
experimental design: can you smell fear?
Journal of Biological Education 45:102-105
Experimental design: Can you smell fear?

24. Over time teaching activities evolve
Ethics dimension in Year 2 module for Med Biochemists
Wanted novel assignment, not course essay
Initially developed task producing websites about ethical topic
Became obsolete as blogging services such as Blogger and Wordpress
emerged
Fall in cost of digital cameras and availability of editing tools allowed for
replacement
Students now produce short videos on bioethics
Two opportunities

25. Both the original web-authoring task and the video-production activity
became publications
Willmott CJR (2015)
Teaching bioethics via the production
of student-generated videos
Journal of Biological Education 49:127-138
Willmott CJR and Wellens J (2004)
Teaching about bioethics through
authoring of websites
Journal of Biological Education 39:27-31
Two opportunities: two papers

26. Both papers included:
Practical advice on running similar task
Pre- and post-intervention surveys. Self-reporting
- knowledge of bioethics
- interest in bioethics
- knowledge of web-authoring/film-making
- interest in web-authoring/film-making
Example feedback demonstrating student satisfaction
Web-paper included analysis of topics identified as involving bioethics
before/after
Video paper noted student-generated films available to public
= “Students as Producers”
Two opportunities: two papers

27. • Likely that you are actually already sitting on a gold-mine of
potentially interesting data, e.g.
- Exam performance?
- Module review and feedback forms?
- Completion rates? First destination data?
• Quantitative data?
• Qualitative data?
• Triangulation?*
http://www.rumrill.net/brian/pics/pics5/pics5/DarthVader/darth_vader_closeup.jpg
* Triangulation = synthesising evidence of different types
and from different sources, in order to arrive at conclusions
“I haven’t got any data”

28. In addition to the items detailed above, keep a conscious look out
and archive:
• Emails?
- From students?
- From colleagues?
• Corridor conversations?
- Capture as soon as you can, verbatim if possible
- Ask to repeat in an email
• Formal peer evaluations?
Useful for (S)FHEA applications & promotions, but may be
publication-relevant too
Evidence – think wider than our science training

29. • Started evaluation?
• Spotted how you may have done something better?
(the “year two” dilemma)
• Don’t panic, it may not be fatal
• Can’t ‘do that extra experiment’
• Be honest, be self-critical
• “Warts and all”
www.generalmonck.com/biography.htm
“I’m worried about my data”

30. Most journals now require ethical approval for all educational research
UoL requires approval for all research involving human subjects
Straightforward, generally uncontroversial “light touch”
Application process (NB can’t be retrospective!)
https://www2.le.ac.uk/institution/ethics/approval
Ethical approval

31. - Gamification?
- Authentic Assessment?
- “Pivot” to online learning?
Virtual labs?
- Emerging technologies?
- Research-led teaching?
- BAME attainment?
- Student well-being?
Old faithfuls:
- Assessment
- Feedback
Current issues/Horizon scanning

32. • Blogs?
- about pedagogy?
- as a specific resource?
• Slideshare?
• Pre-prints? e.g. BioRxiv.org, Preprints.org
• Conference presentations?
- Biosummit?
- STEM Horizons?
- HEA STEM?
- HEA Annual?
- Institutional T&L events?
- Education section of Learned Society?
Grey publication

33. Actual communities:
•BS-SOTL and Bioscience PedR
•UoL Learning and Teaching
•Conferences
Virtual communities:
•Become active in online conversations
- JISCMAIL lists
- HEABio-PedR
- SEDA
- #DryLabsRealScience network
- Wed 8pm @LTHEchat on Twitter
Community of Practice

34. Discussion of paper
• Active learning in the lecture theatre using 3D printed objects
David Smith (2016)
F1000Research 2016 5:61 (doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.7632.2)
Reasons to pick this paper include:
- Example of paper drawn from
teaching innovation
- David visited and talked about
this work in the Spring
- “Open peer review” can see
expectations of reviewers

35. Discussion of paper: in groups
• In groups, consider the following questions:
- What is the intervention described in the paper?
- What evidence of effectiveness is offered?
- How strongly is the work grounded in pedagogic literature?
- Identify three strengths of the paper?
- Identify two weaknesses of the paper?
- If time allows, are there any other lessons to note from this work?

36. Discussion of paper: in groups
15 minutes in Breakout groups – try to answer as many of the questions
as possible, then we will discuss together
http://tinyurl.com/clock2x4y6

37. Discussion of paper: in groups
• In groups, consider the following questions:
- What is the intervention described in the paper?
- What evidence of effectiveness is offered?
- How strongly is the work grounded in pedagogic literature?
- Identify three strengths of the paper?
- Identify two weaknesses of the paper?
- If time allows, are there any other lessons to note from this work?

38. Developing your own papers
• Chance now to reflect on possible publications
- Is there anything you are already doing that could be turned
into a paper?
- What additional things would you need to make it publishable
(e.g. evaluation)?
- Is there anything you could develop next academic year?
Maybe planning over summer?
- Is there potential for collaboration?
• Before Breakout rooms, some pointers…

39. (1) Working title of paper (20 words)
(2) Authors (in anticipated order)
(3) Anticipated journal (check style guide)
(4) Intended readership?
(5a) Central question addressed by paper? (30 words)
(5b) Insights the paper provides? (30 words)
(6) A one-sentence summary of the paper? (25 words)
(7a) What was the problem and why was it important? (70 words)
… Continued >>>
Checklist for getting started (after Raine)

40. (7b) What methods did you/will you use to gather evidence? (70 words)
(7c) What were the key outcomes? (100 words)
(7d) What is already known about this? (70 words)
(7e) What do you add to the theory about this? (70 words)
(7f) What do you add to the practice? (70 words)
(8) What remains unsolved?
After Derek Raine (modelled on Robert Brown’s “Eight questions”
https://tinyurl.com/WriteRightFirstTime)
Checklist for getting started (after Raine)

41. Is your activity readily adaptable for use by others?
- check it is not entirely context-dependent
Is your activity well described?
- good innovations often poorly explained
Is it in right format for the journal?
- check house style rules
Is there anything similar/identical in literature?
- check for existing work
Is there some evaluation?
- needs to be SOME, even if not extensive
Do I have ethical approval?
Checklist

42. Discussion of paper: in groups
10 minutes more in Breakout groups – float a few ideas with colleagues
http://tinyurl.com/clock2x4y6

43. • Getting Started in Pedagogic Research
within the STEM Disciplines
Michael Grove and Tina Overton (2013)
https://tinyurl.com/GroveOverton
Further reading

44. Getting started in Education Research publication may not be as much
of a stretch as you imagine
Start with ways to turn something you are already doing into a paper
by adding some (albeit minimal) evaluation
If unlikely to have enough for a “full paper” try for a Short Comm/Case
Study/Illumination
Be active in pedagogy in other ways: conferences, blogs, discussion
lists
Summary

45. E-mail: cjrw2@le.ac.uk
Twitter: cjrw
Slideshare: cjrw2
Blogs: www.biologyonthebox.wordpress.com
www.biosciencecareers.wordpress.com
www.lefthandedbiochemist.wordpress.com
Any questions?