What?!? Poetry in Pathology?
Can students create pathology poetry in wiki groups to help them understand complex systemic pathology concepts? Preposterous. But…then again, there is growing evidence that student engagement enhances understanding, thus supporting active approaches to teaching and learning (Michael, 2006). So we decided to put the research to the test: how could we engage 95 second year veterinary students to master highly complex pathology concepts and avoid serious injury? Traditionally, all teaching in CVM 6299, including the topics listed in this project, had been conducted by didactic lecture and on rare occasion presented in the laboratory portion of the course. Based on demonstration of variable and sometimes poor retention of pathology information by fourth year veterinary students, we considered other options to teach this information in an active learning format during the second year. We pondered, and ultimately decided to create an interactive cooperative learning poetry wiki project, designed to enhance both student engagement and understanding of selected systemic pathology topics.
Why Wiki Groups?
A wiki, which is simply a website, allows selected visitors (our students!) to actively participate and create or edit site contents without any special technical knowledge or tools. The advantages of using wikis abound. Anyone using a computer with an online connection (and permission from the coordinator of a given wiki) can participate on a wiki from any location, face-to-face or from any distance. Wikis promote collaboration with a small or large number of participants (students!) on projects such as: sharing online information, including technical product information, research data, development programs, or other collaborative projects. More open in structure than blogs or e-mail, wikis allow participants to build upon each other’s input (Evans, 2008). Information created on wikis can be continuously updated, rendering it highly conducive as an active collaboration tool for creating and sharing a myriad of projects, especially with groups of students (Lamb, 2004).
Cooperative learning formats, long recognized as a highly effective learning tool, allow students to collaborate in groups and actually teach each other (Johnson et al., 1998). As effective and often superior to classroom lecture, cooperative learning engages student interest and promotes information retention (Felder, 1993; Cooper et al., 1990).
Given the convenient accessibility of working with wikis and the feasibility of integrating cooperative formats to engage student groups, we embarked on creating a project, holding students responsible for learning the assigned material and sharing with wiki group members to complete project requirements. We hypothesized that: 1) students reading poems on pathology topics would be more engaged and retain more information than notes alone, resulting in higher test scores, 2) students working in groups to plan and construct a poem on a particular topic would demonstrate higher scores on questions corresponding to that topic, and 3) students would enjoy the experience of creating and reading poems as an alternative to notes.
Launching Operation Wiki Poetry Groups
To hatch this student project, we created wiki sites, a student rubric, online exams (pre- and post-test) and a student project survey as part of a cooperative learning laboratory in CVM 6299 Systemic Veterinary Pathology (Information Technology Unit, 2011). All project components - wikis, tests and surveys - took place on restricted-access Moodle sites, a software package for producing internet-based courses and websites, operated by the University of Minnesota.
Ninety-five second year veterinary students completed an online pre-test to assess their base knowledge of specific topics on gastrointestinal (GI) pathology. The pre-test consisted of 15 questions randomized from a pool of 46 questions. Students were then randomly placed in one of 23 wiki groups (4-5 students per group), each of which were assigned a specific GI pathology topic. The rubric clearly delineated project expectations and criteria for mastery (Figure 1).
Figure 1. Rubric criteria for construction of gastrointestinal (GI) pathology poems.
Students gained points by participating in wiki discussions to list key words and phrases on the assigned topic (Figure 2) as directed in the rubric.
Figure 2. Gastrointestinal (GI) pathology subject topics.
Each of the 23 cooperative learning wiki groups assembled their key word list, which they subsequently used to create their poem (prose, haiku, limerick, standard, rhyme or non-rhyme). If any group experienced significant difficulty creating a poem, they could choose to create a paragraph or bullet points. As required, each group addressed at least 5 of 10 rubric categories in their poem. Instructors monitored student participation by accessing each wiki group site.
Student groups 1-12, also referred to as Trial 1 Group, and groups 13-23, referred to as Trial 2 Group, read poems on separate topics. Trial 1 poems (12 poems) and Trial 2 poems (11 poems) were collated separately; all students also received abridged notes covering all GI topics. Students were given 5 days to review their notes and assigned Trial Group poems, before completing the online post-test.
The post-test, comprised of 20 random questions from a pool of 46, covered 20 of the 23 GI topics. Both pre- and post-test questions came from the same pool of 46 questions. All students answered 10 questions corresponding to poems read and 10 questions corresponding to the notes read. Following the post-test, students also completed an online evaluation of the poetry project to assess their preferences and perspectives of this overall project.
Back to Our Hypotheses: What We Discovered
Were students more engaged and would they retain more information with poetry than notes alone? Engaged yes. More retention? Not consistently. Although results in Trial 1 and Trial 2 indicated significantly greater post-test scores as compared to pre-test scores (Table 1), data also indicated marked differences between trials in test scores on topic questions corresponding to poems read and scores on topic questions corresponding to notes read (Table 2). Survey results showed that 84% of the students reported that sharing wiki GI poems is a more effective tool for learning if combined with lecture or notes (Table 3).
Table 1. Evaluation of pre-test scores versus post-test scores in Trials 1 and 2.
Table 2. Effects of poems and notes differ between trials.
Table 3. Wiki poetry project student survey results.
Did students demonstrate higher scores on questions corresponding to the poems they read? Yes and no. Trial 1 students scored significantly higher on questions corresponding to the poems they read, while Trial 2 students scored significantly higher on questions corresponding to the notes they read. In other words, in both trials students scored highest on the same questions whether or not they were taught by poem or notes. Additionally, depending on the trial approximately 50-60% of students correctly answered the exam question corresponding to the poem they created (Table 2). Regardless, survey results showed that over 90% of the students reported that researching a specific GI topic and working in groups helped to learn that specific topic.
Did students enjoy the experience of creating and reading poems as an alternative to notes? Yes. Approximately 87% of the students agreed or somewhat agreed that they enjoyed working on the wiki group poetry project. Likewise, 82% of the students enjoyed reading the GI poems whether or not they improved learning or retention. Examples of student comments include:
“It gave my brain another method to interpret and understand the material and gave me the opportunity to express more creative skills.”
“Writing and reading the poems helped me learn the information. It was ‘learning in disguise’.”
“I liked the opportunity to throw ideas around with other classmates in order to obtain a full, comprehensive understanding of our topic.”
So, Where Do We Go From Here?
Students, particularly millennial students, often learn effectively in cooperative learning environments that promote interaction, engagement and accountability. Although the contrasting results in Trial 1 and 2 Groups did not support our hypothesis that cooperative learning and poem creation and sharing would improve exam scores, student comments indicate an overall positive response to group learning and a change of pace from traditional lecture. Comments support that the overall cooperative learning poetry project engaged most students and enhanced their learning.
Even though post-test scores were consistently higher than pre-test scores, this may not be attributed solely to the use of cooperative learning and wiki poems. We also remain uncertain as to why test scores were significantly lower on a particular set of topic questions (right column in Figure 2). The study was fully randomized in terms of assigning students into groups, the topic assigned to each group, the order of the questions and correct letter answer in individual exams. Additionally, the questions were written as baseline pathology information that a second year veterinary student would be expected to know. Although test item difficulty level ranged between the knowledge and comprehension level on Bloom’s Taxonomy of the cognitive domain, we will check for potential difficulty aberrations that might explain the specified lower scores. Another factor that might implicate this scoring discrepancy relates to student comments revealing frustration over attempting to answer several test questions that contained content not covered in some of the poems. This problem might be addressed by examining the difficulty of the test questions and also by requiring the students to utilize more of the rubric items/criteria in each of their poems.
Based on our findings, we assert that post-test scores could likely improve by: 1) assigning course points based on extent of wiki participation; 2) applying test scores to the overall course grade; 3) requiring students to meet all 10 criteria delineated on the grading rubric; and 4) requiring students to work in groups on multiple pathology topics.
Our project revealed significant benefits for both students and instructors. For students, the wiki site minimized the time required for face-to-face meetings and allowed for real-time engagement and learning outside of class, from the convenience of one’s own computer. For instructors, although instructor set-up time was substantial, the online tests and surveys streamlined the instructor time needed to monitor projects, grade exams, provide feedback to students and collect research data on the project. Additionally, the poetry project, as a result of the electronic format is easily transferrable for reuse in years to come. The implications of improving both student learning and condensing instructor time provide significant incentive for future work in these areas.
References
Cooper, J., S. Prescott, et al. (1990). Cooperative learning and college instruction. CA State Univ. Foundation, Long Beach, CA.
Evans, P. (2008). The Wiki Factor. BizEd, pp. 26-32.
Felder, R. (1993). What matters in college. Chem. Engr. Ed. 27(4), pp. 194-195.
Information Technology Unit (ITU), 2011. "Moodle serves as an online e-learning platform to facilitate the communications between teachers and students." E- Learning Features. http://www.cpce-polyu.edu.hk/itu/new/
Johnson, David W., Roger T. Johnson, & Karl A. Smith, "Cooperative Learning Returns To College: What Evidence Is There That It Works?" Change, July/August 1998, pp. 27-35.
Lamb, B. (2004). Wide Open Spaces: Wikis, Ready or Not. EDUCAUSE Review, 39:5, pp. 36–48.
Michael, J. (2006). Advan in Physiol Edu 30, pp. 159-167.