1. Dr Robert Cockcroft
McMaster Institute for Innovation and Excellence in Teaching and Learning (MIIETL)
Physics and Astronomy Department
Integrated Science Program
Kaitlyn Gonsalves
Department of Psychology, Neuroscience and Behaviour, Level IV
MIIETL Student Scholar, 2015-2016
Susan He
Department of Biology, Level IV
MIIETL Student Scholar, 2015-2016
Devra Charney
Arts & Science and English, Alumna
MIIETL Student Scholar, 2014-2015
How Do Students’ Perceptions of
SCIENCE 1A03 Compare Over Time?

2. Outline
SCIENCE 1A03
Pedagogical study
2014 results
Overview of previously
reported results
New: Impressions of
mentors from 2014
2015 results
Perceptions over time
Future work
R

3. Piloted Sep-Dec 2014; second offering Sep-Dec 2015
Instructors:
Dr Sarah Symons and Dr Mic Farquharson
Instructional Coordinator:
Geneviève van Wersch
SCIENCE 1A03 Investigating Science:
Opportunities and Experience
R
2014 2015
Students 158 275
Mentors 25 33
TAs 4 6

4. Five hours of class per week
Two hours together as a class
Three hours in sections
Course components
MRIs (or mini-research investigations)
Skill development activities
Introductory talks from the different science disciplines
Assessment
Avenue-based weekly quizzes (30%)
MRI deliverables (40%)
Learning Portfolio written reflection (30%)
SCIENCE 1A03 Investigating Science:
Opportunities and Experience
R

5. Pedagogical Study:
Impact and Perception of SCIENCE 1A03
Ethics approval: MREB 2014 162
Visited students twice in tutorials
Pre- and post-surveys
Purpose of the study, informed consent, what will happen,
confidentiality & concerns, benefits, questions
Completely voluntary; did not affect grades
Online / paper copies of survey
Three consent options
Survey follow-up questions
Focus group
Grant access to course reflections
Follow-up possibility in Level II, III, IV
New data: mentors and focus group follow-up
S

6. 2014 Results Overview
7 = Extremely Useful
1 = Extremely Unhelpful
7 = Extremely Enjoyable
1 = Extremely Unenjoyable
Most enjoyed components
Introductory lectures (22)
MRIs (12)
Small-group work (10)
Mentors (8)
“I found the ‘introducing...’
lectures to be the most
enjoyable component of
this course. It helped me
choose which program I
would like to go into next
year and gave me a
glimpse of all the possible
opportunities in that field.”
“I enjoyed the Mini
Research
Investigations the most
because it engages
one in various areas of
science and gives an
insight to that science
that helps develop
communication and
teamwork skills.”
K

7. 2014 Results Overview
Would you take the
course again, now
knowing what you know?
Would you recommend this
course to other incoming
first-year students?
Components with room
for improvement:
MRIs (24)
“I could still see the MRI's having
the most room for development. A
lot of the MRIs are extremely well
developed, except certain parts
of them are a bit awkward, shall I
say. The one where you had to
go out and measure the
circumference of a tree comes to
mind, as that is a more difficult
task to accomplish in the short
time that was given to us.”
“MRIs, they are just a little
rough, but nothing that
can't be fixed ”
K

8. New Results from 2014
First-year students’ impressions of peer mentors
Peer mentors led tutorials
Supported MRIs
Non-MRI weeks:
Answering questions or concerns raised by the students,
Introducing topics that were deemed relevant based on their
own experience
test and exam preparation,
decreasing stress levels,
Level II program selection
Elaborated on the material from class.
Preparation for these tutorials occurred as part of the
mentorship course.
R

9. Mentor Question 1
45 Responses (29%)
How beneficial were the peer-mentors to your
success this semester?
Ratings 0-4 has zero responses
7 = Very beneficial
6 = Beneficial
5 = Slightly beneficial
S

10. Mentor Question 2
From your perspective, what were the benefits of
having peer-mentors?
35 Gave good/helpful advice
22 Relatable for first year students/can speak from
experience about university life
18 Offered their insight into upper year programs
12 Could explain course concepts effectively and
answer questions
11 Approachable/friendly
4 They were easier to approach/more useful than
were TAs
K

11. Mentor Question 3
R
Were there any challenges associated with having
peer-mentors?

12. Mentor Question 4
The peer-mentors were working to develop their own
skills through the course. Did you notice development in
any of your peer-mentors?
17 More effective class presentation/leadership skills
15 More approachable/better communication skills
13 More confident/comfortable
5 Better able to explain concepts and answer
questions
2 More organized/prepared
S

13. Mentor Question 5
Do you have any other comments about the peer
mentors that you feel would be important to share?
16 Great/awesome/friendly/useful /thank you for
mentoring us
3 Helped me transition into university
2 My favourite aspect of this course
K

14. Dec 2015 Results
Focus groups
Originally planned 6 groups
Chance to win 1 of 2 Bookstore vouchers ($25 each)
4 interviews conducted in November
Approximately 30 minutes each
Transcribed; finished in December
R
https://rmsbunkerblog.wordpress.com/tag/focus-group-facility-in-syracuse-ny/ http://blog.smartbear.com/requirements/how-to-interview-users-to-find-out-what-they-really-want//

15. Interview Questions
SCIENCE 1A03’s influence on decisions?
Transferable MRI experience/skill set?
Appreciation changed?
Missing components from “Introductory…” talks?
Should course be mandatory?
S

16. Preliminary Coding Results
Did SCIENCE 1A03 influence you for any of your
decisions from Level I to Level II or for your potential
future career?
Level I II: Nuances
More-informed approach
Career: No
S
“[The intro talks] were nice. They
helped… I actually thought biochem
was more what I was going to go with
then I realized [it was] more bio than
biochem that I actually wanted.”
“Being introduced to all the
programs and being able to
kinda see that, even though
you started on program you
can still branch off to other
ones. I think that was a really
important factor in me making
my decision.” [Chem phys
life sci]

17. Preliminary Coding Results
Have you experienced any work in other courses
apart from SCIENCE 1A03 where your MRI (mini-
research investigations) experience/skill set has
helped you?
How to read a journal
Teamwork
Leadership
Problem-solving within a group
Goal-setting
Editing your own writing
Presentations – introductory
Computer - introductory
K

18. Preliminary Coding Results
Is there anything from your SCIENCE 1A03 that you
didn’t appreciate at the time, but now you have come
to appreciate having had the experience? (No, but…)
Opportunities and insights
Draft and feedback on your work
Introductory talks
Seeing differences between benefits to individuals versus the class
Study tips from mentors
Seeing mentors’ different presentation styles
Pros
No textbook
“Lighter” course
No exam
Suggestions
Lab component
R

19. Preliminary Coding Results
Are there any aspects of SCIENCE 1A03 that you
haven’t found useful [for other courses yet]?
Didn’t find useful:
MRI instructions not clear
Content of a particular MRI (carbon sequestration)
TA was not engaged
Communication between TAs and mentors
How to find/write a journal article was not included
S

20. Preliminary Coding Results
Now that you have transitioned into Level II, do you
think there was any other material that could have
been included in the “Introductory…” Talks but that
was missing when you saw them?
Not really! Very well received
One response: needed
more from the student
experience/perspective
K
“… There are so many options
and you don’t know any of
them… I had no idea that
other program was like that…
They gave a run-down of what
the program is like and then
had some videos and
examples. I think those are
pretty well structured.”

21. Continuing Work
More detailed analysis
Comparing incoming students: 1A03 and non-1A03 students
Comparing 1A03 pre- and post-survey
Include perspectives from mentors, TAs, instructors
Mentors
Enrolled “SCIENCE 3A03 – Peer Mentoring in Science” course
Instructors: Kris Knorr, Dr Lori Goff
Mentors’ reflections on their own experiences
Survey follow-up questions
Focus group (Jan / Feb 2016)
Fold in course reflection components
Continue follow-up possibility in Levels II, III, IV
Phase III
Continuation of study for the Sep 2016 course
R