Ramey, C. J., & Schoonmaker, J., & Ryan, S. M. (2017, June), Studio Biology For Engineers: Lessons Learned   Paper presented at 2017 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Columbus, Ohio. 10.18260/1-2--28874

\bibitem{asee_peer_28874}
  Ramey, C. J., \& Schoonmaker, J., \& Ryan, S. M. (2017, June), \emph{Studio Biology For Engineers: Lessons Learned }
  Paper presented at 2017 ASEE Annual Conference \& Exposition, Columbus, Ohio.
  10.18260/1-2--28874

Christopher Josh Ramey, Judy Schoonmaker, and Sarah  M. Ryan.  "Studio Biology For Engineers: Lessons Learned ".  2017 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Columbus, Ohio, 2017, June.  ASEE Conferences, 2017.  https://peer.asee.org/28874 Internet.  15 Dec, 2024

\bibitem{asee_peer_28874}
  Christopher Josh Ramey, Judy Schoonmaker, and Sarah  M. Ryan.
  "Studio Biology For Engineers: Lessons Learned ".
  \emph{2017 ASEE Annual Conference \& Exposition, Columbus, Ohio, 2017, June}.
  ASEE Conferences, 2017.
  https://peer.asee.org/28874 Internet.  15 Dec, 2024

@INPROCEEDINGS{asee_peer_28874
author = "Christopher Josh Ramey, Judy Schoonmaker, and Sarah  M. Ryan"
title = "Studio Biology For Engineers: Lessons Learned "
booktitle = "2017 ASEE Annual Conference \& Exposition"
year = "2017"
month = "June"
address = "Columbus, Ohio"
publisher = "ASEE Conferences"
note = {https://peer.asee.org/28874}
number = {10.18260/1-2--28874}
}

TY  - CPAPER
AB  - 

“Active learning should be the central dogma of science education”. A growing body of data supports the conclusion that active learning does indeed trump the traditional lecture, both in terms of student retention and student performance. Recent efforts at the Colorado School of Mines to integrate biology into our engineering curriculum have led to a revised foundational biology course that has rigor and relevance for our engineering students. The move from traditional lecture to an active learning environment was key to our efforts to engage our students and improve how much and how well our students learn the basics of biology.  Our course re-design involved a 3-pronged approach in which we: (1) renovated a classroom to create a studio environment with wet-lab capability; (2) implemented a constructivist pedagogy and (3) designed a training program to develop graduate teaching assistants (TAs) who could support a student-centered learning experience. We affirm that change is difficult, time-consuming, and expensive. However, the positive impact of these changes has been apparent from the beginning and as we continue to change the culture at our institution. Our new studio biology classroom and course have helped our campus move forward with the implementation of innovative pedagogy and creative new learning spaces. In this essay, we offer a description of this course transformation and several lessons learned from the process. We hope that our experiences can help others in their efforts to achieve more effective teaching and learning in biology. 

AU  - Christopher Josh Ramey
AU  - Judy Schoonmaker
AU  - Sarah  M. Ryan
CY  - Columbus, Ohio
DA  - 2017/06/24
PB  - ASEE Conferences
TI  - Studio Biology For Engineers: Lessons Learned 
UR  - https://peer.asee.org/28874
DO  - 10.18260/1-2--28874
ER  -