Engineering-Other (59) This project creates inquiry-based laboratory modules to expose students to nanobiotechnology and increase specific skills in nanomaterial synthesis and characterization. The specific topic areas of the modules are 1) nanopatterned antibacterial surfaces, and 2) creation and characterization of nanostructures for use in bioimplants. The topics areas are intentionally multidisciplinary to enable students to spend time on one scientific concept and learn several biology and nanotechnology laboratory techniques in one unit, and to encourage multidisciplinary team work. The goals of the modules are to increase skills in nanomaterial synthesis and characterization, develop experimental skills, augment student interest and confidence in pursuing the subject matter, and encourage students to pursue higher level nano-courses as well as research projects. The course is targeted to sophomores from across engineering and science.
The overall goal of the project was to give undergraduate students the opportunity to learn nanobiotechnology through active, problem-based laboratory experiences articulated in a "Grand Challenge," an inquiry-based module that students address in collaborative teams. Over a two-year period, 29 students participated in the experience, which was taught by two WPI professors, assisted by two teaching assistants and an external evaluator. The objectives were to: create a new course in nanobiotechnology, Increase students’ knowledge of nanobiotechnology, Increase the skills of undergraduate engineering students in developing research methodology, enhance the interest and enthusiasm of undergraduate students for nanobiotechnology, Prepare students to deliver high-quality oral and written presentation projects, and disseminate nanobiotechnology modules to colleagues in a range of engineering departments at other institutions. The Intellectual Merit of this work is that a new Grand Challenges Laboratory course was created in Nanobiotechnology. The open-ended and cutting-edge nature of the course was a plus for most students. For instance, students noted that "It was a neat experience to perform labs where the results are unknown." … "fascinating" to find unknown results. Students wrote that they were "able to see nanotech firsthand" … "got to see what’s actually going on out there." The learning approach was centered around a well-known educational model, which includes the steps Engage, Explore, Explain, Elaborate, and Evaluate. Faculty presented factual knowledge consistent with students’ backgrounds and prior experience and adjusted the course accordingly during both project years. Students generally worked collaboratively in groups in both in the labs and on other course assignments. During class time, faculty facilitated students’ explanations and evaluations of their work. In addition, faculty provided content and context where needed. The intellectual challenge inherent to the Grand Challenge was present. Students pursued answers to real-world, cutting-edge research questions. Solutions to labs related to the questions were open-ended. In interviews and on surveys, most students reported that the course was challenging (86%). Students gained knowledge of nanobiotechnology. The mean score for the six-item knowledge test completed on the first day of class was 45.9%. On the last day of class the mean score for the same test was 84.5%. Students showed greatest gains in naming main approaches to creating nanomaterials and in defining factors that control bacterial adhesion to nano-coated surfaces. In their lab reports, most students demonstrated an understanding of application of these concepts. As improving the students’ ability to solve open-ended problems was an important goal of the Grand Challenge, students were ask to self-assess their ability to solve open ended problems. Students’ self-ratings of their ability to solve such problems were significantly higher at the end of the course than at the beginning. Generally, the course was intellectually challenging to students. Approximately 75% of the students indicated on course evaluations that they learned "much more" or "more" in the course than in other courses at WPI. Two students’ comments provide some insight into the ways in which the course was challenging. One student wrote, "It was more fascinating than I thought it would be to find answers which were completely out of the blue and why we got the results we did." During an interview, a student addressed the open-ended nature of the course: "really like it, not knowing the answer ... but difficult not having the right answer ... don’t get a lot of that in school." The Broader Impacts of this work are that a diverse group of students were trained in a hands-on laboratory experience, which provided them with valuable skills and the opportunity to participate in a Grand Challenge, to work in teams, to learn about cutting-edge research methods, and to practice written and oral presentation skills. Students from a number of departments participated in the course, including chemical engineering majors, mechanical engineering, biomedical engineering, and materials science. Almost all (93%) of the students indicated no prior nanotechnology experience. Each team prepared a video on one aspect of the Grand Challenge, which will be used to disseminate this information to national and international audiences. In addition, students were asked to volunteer as activity leaders for WPI’s February Engineering Week program, Introduce a Girl to Engineering. Over two years, 100 2nd-4th grade girls participated in hands-on engineering and science activities. The girls who participated in the program rated it enthusiastically. Almost all (95%) of the girls noted that they were "very interested" (70%) or "interested" (25%) in engineering after the day.
