Search

The article reports on the public art photography business of Rob Wilkinson and Colleen Chartier in Seattle, Washington. Wilkinson had a word-processing business that was burnt down while Chartier was a fine art photographer. Chartier and Wilkinson decided to team up and make a business out of taking photographs of local public art. Wilkinson was taught photography by Chartier and Wilkinson made use of his computer skills for the business. Some of their photographs were used for textbooks, public art projects and architecture collections. According to the author, a straight forward shot of the Eiffel Tower was the most requested image.

Information on the topics discussed at the annual conference of the International Sculpture Center (ISC) in Seattle, Washington from October 15-17, 2007 regarding outdoor art exhibits is presented. Topics include the challenge to maintain the work that is exposed to the elements, issues on landscaping, and theoretical concerns. The conference featured several artists including Buster Simpson, Dennis Oppenheim, and Ned Rifkin.

College science programs exhibit high rates of student attrition, especially among Students of Color, women, members of the LGBTQ+ community, and those with disabilities. Many of the reasons students choose to leave or feel pushed out of science can be mitigated through participation in faculty-mentored research. However, faculty resources are limited, and not every student has access to faculty mentoring due to systemic or structural barriers. By bringing authentic scientific research into the classroom context, course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) expand the number of students who participate in research and provide benefits similar to faculty-mentored research. Instructors also benefit from teaching CUREs. Using a systematic review of 14 manuscripts concerning the Malate Dehydrogenase CUREs Community (MCC) and malate dehydrogenase (MDH) CUREs, we demonstrate that CUREs can be implemented flexibly, are authentic research experiences, generate new scientific discoveries, and improve student outcomes. Additionally, CURE communities offer substantial advantages to faculty wishing to implement CUREs., (© 2024 The Author(s). Published by Portland Press Limited on behalf of the Biochemical Society.)

In response to calls for reform in undergraduate biology education, we conducted research examining how varying active-learning strategies impacted students' conceptual understanding, attitudes, and motivation in two sections of a large-lecture introductory cell and molecular biology course. Using a quasi-experimental design, we collected quantitative data to compare participants' conceptual understanding, attitudes, and motivation in the biological sciences across two contexts that employed different active-learning strategies and that were facilitated by unique instructors. Students participated in either graphic organizer/worksheet activities or clicker-based case studies. After controlling for demographic and presemester affective differences, we found that students in both active-learning environments displayed similar and significant learning gains. In terms of attitudinal and motivational data, significant differences were observed for two attitudinal measures. Specifically, those students who had participated in graphic organizer/worksheet activities demonstrated more expert-like attitudes related to their enjoyment of biology and ability to make real-world connections. However, all motivational and most attitudinal data were not significantly different between the students in the two learning environments. These data reinforce the notion that active learning is associated with conceptual change and suggests that more research is needed to examine the differential effects of varying active-learning strategies on students' attitudes and motivation in the domain., (© 2017 L. M. Cleveland et al. CBE—Life Sciences Education © 2017 The American Society for Cell Biology. This article is distributed by The American Society for Cell Biology under license from the author(s). It is available to the public under an Attribution–Noncommercial–Share Alike 3.0 Unported Creative Commons License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0).)

Within the past decade, course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) have emerged as a viable mechanism to enhance novices' development of scientific reasoning and process skills in the science, technology, engineering, and mathematics disciplines. Recent evidence within the bioeducation literature suggests that student engagement in such experiences not only increases their appreciation for and interest in scientific research but also enhances their ability to "think like a scientist." Despite these critical outcomes, few studies have objectively explored CURE versus non-CURE students' development of content knowledge, attitudes, and motivation in the discipline, particularly among nonvolunteer samples. To address these concerns, we adopted a mixed-methods approach to evaluate the aforementioned outcomes following implementation of a novel CURE in an introductory cell/molecular biology course. Results indicate that CURE participants exhibited more expert-like outcomes on these constructs relative to their non-CURE counterparts, including in those areas related to self-efficacy, self-determination, and problem-solving strategies. Furthermore, analysis of end-of-term survey data suggests that select features of the CURE, such as increased student autonomy and collaboration, mediate student learning and enjoyment. Collectively, this research provides novel insights into the benefits achieved as a result of CURE participation and can be used to guide future development and evaluation of authentic research opportunities., (© 2016 J. T. Olimpo et al. CBE—Life Sciences Education © 2016 The American Society for Cell Biology. This article is distributed by The American Society for Cell Biology under license from the author(s). It is available to the public under an Attribution–Noncommercial–Share Alike 3.0 Unported Creative Commons License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0).)

To build an understanding of the neurobiology underpinning arm recovery in people with severe arm impairment due to stroke, we conducted a pooled individual data systematic review to: 1) characterize brain biomarkers; 2) determine relationship(s) between biomarkers and motor outcome; and 3) establish relationship(s) between biomarkers and motor recovery. Three electronic databases were searched up to October 2, 2015. Eligible studies included adults with severe arm impairment after stroke. Descriptive statistics were calculated to characterize brain biomarkers, and pooling of individual patient data was performed using mixed-effects linear regression to examine relationships between brain biomarkers and motor outcome and recovery. Thirty-eight articles including individual data from 372 people with severe arm impairment were analysed. The majority of individuals were in the chronic (> 6 months) phase post stroke (51%) and had a subcortical stroke (49%). The presence of a motor evoked potential (indexed by transcranial magnetic stimulation) was the only biomarker related to better motor outcome ( p  = 0.02). There was no relationship between motor outcome and stroke volume (cm 3 ), location (cortical, subcortical, mixed) or side (left vs. right), and corticospinal tract asymmetry index (extracted from diffusion weighted imaging). Only one study had longitudinal data, thus no data pooling was possible to address change over time (preventing our third objective). Based on the available evidence, motor evoked potentials at rest were the only biomarker that predicted motor outcome in individuals with severe arm impairment following stroke. Given that few biomarkers emerged, this review highlights the need to move beyond currently known biomarkers and identify new indices with sufficient variability and sensitivity to guide recovery models in individuals with severe motor impairments following stroke., Prospero: CRD42015026107.