My love for teaching started at a young age. It started with helping neighboring classmates with learning material and eventually evolved into teaching lower division undergraduates microbiology and immunology as a teaching assistant during my junior and senior year of college at North Dakota State University. Working with and learning from the instructors of those courses inspired me to continue teaching. Shortly after graduating with my B.S. in microbiology, I began a position at the University of Minnesota, teaching general chemistry laboratories as a teaching specialist. I loved being in that classroom because I saw how much potential each student harbored. I never wanted to stop teaching, but I realized I wanted to have more authority in designing the coursework, and I also wanted to lead lectures. I knew in order to achieve these goals, I would need to earn a PhD. For this reason, I earned a Master's degree in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education at the University of Kentucky and enrolled at Auburn University in a Biological Sciences PhD program. For exact details concerning my teaching experience, please see my CV on the home page. On this page, you will find lessons I have used in the classroom as well as sweet or inspiring stories that keep my love of teaching strong.
Teaching at the University of Minnesota's Nature of Life
This summer my advisor, Dr. A. Kelly Lane, invited me to co-teach a module during the first two sessions of the University of Minnesota's Nature of Life (NOL) program. Nature of Life is a four-day trip to the University of Minnesota’s Itasca Biological Station and Laboratories that all incoming students to the College of Biological Sciences (CBS) attend prior to the start of their first fall semester. This series helps CBS undergraduate students build community, create connections, and develop the skills, self-awareness, and habits of mind that research shows contribute to success in college and beyond. Click here for more information on NOL.
The module Kelly and I co-taught focused, broadly, on the nature of science. We assigned students into groups of 3-4 and had them work through a missing computer chip investigation. First, we gave them very minimal information about the situation and had them make an initial hypothesis about what happened to the computer chip, asking them to consider who stole the computer chip, why they stole it, and when they stole it. Next, we iteratively gave them more information and had them revise their hypotheses at each step. Finally, they created concept maps on whiteboards to present to the rest of class. In their presentations, they had to back up their claims of who, why, and when with evidence. After their presentations, we asked the students to reflect on this activity and relate it to what they expect to learn in their science classes at the University of Minnesota in the fall.
The module Kelly and I co-taught focused, broadly, on the nature of science. We assigned students into groups of 3-4 and had them work through a missing computer chip investigation. First, we gave them very minimal information about the situation and had them make an initial hypothesis about what happened to the computer chip, asking them to consider who stole the computer chip, why they stole it, and when they stole it. Next, we iteratively gave them more information and had them revise their hypotheses at each step. Finally, they created concept maps on whiteboards to present to the rest of class. In their presentations, they had to back up their claims of who, why, and when with evidence. After their presentations, we asked the students to reflect on this activity and relate it to what they expect to learn in their science classes at the University of Minnesota in the fall.
Pictured above, me (Emily Driessen) with my advisor (Dr. A. Kelly Lane). Pictured below is me using socratic questioning to get a group of students to more critically think about what evidence they have to back up the claims and connections they were making on their concept map that answered who stole the computer chip, why they stole the computer chip, and when they stole the computer chip. Not pictured, a friendly black bear cub that wandered into view through the window right behind me! NOL was an absolute blast. I especially enjoyed getting to know many of the incoming freshman and hearing about what they are excited to learn about as college students!
To use or not to use: online proctoring software can create and perpetuate inequitable assessment environments for students
When considering what testing environment to create for students, many instructors have been wrestling with online proctoring software. A recent publication I was able to contribute to highlights student concerns with online proctoring environments. I attached the PDF below. To find this open-access article on google scholar, use the following reference:
Pokorny, A., Ballen, C. J., Drake, A. G., Driessen, E. P., Fagbodun, S., Gibbens, B., ... & Lane, A. K. (2023). “Out of my control”: science undergraduates report mental health concerns and inconsistent conditions when using remote proctoring software. International Journal for Educational Integrity, 19(1), 22.
Pokorny, A., Ballen, C. J., Drake, A. G., Driessen, E. P., Fagbodun, S., Gibbens, B., ... & Lane, A. K. (2023). “Out of my control”: science undergraduates report mental health concerns and inconsistent conditions when using remote proctoring software. International Journal for Educational Integrity, 19(1), 22.
Reflecting on my first instructor of record experience: Organismal Biology
During the spring 2021 semester, I co-taught Organismal Biology with Dr. Cissy Ballen. This class is the second in an introductory biology sequence taught at Auburn University. The content of class focuses on the evolution, classification, structure, and spectacular diversity of living organisms, focusing on plants and animals. This course is designed for those in biology-related majors to prepare them for future coursework.
In this course, students were assigned to small groups (ranging from 4 to 6 members) at the beginning of the semester and they worked together virtually - as this course was offered online only for spring 2021 a result of the COVID-19 pandemic - in breakout rooms during every lesson. For example, a typical class period included some lecture, with 3–4 iClicker questions/group discussions every 15 min, as well as a 20-min group activity. Students also took a group exam following individual examinations, allowing for students to confer with their group members over exam materials. This format worked pretty well, although I had a few students email me, explaining that no one in their online breakout rooms was really there (i.e., they had their cameras and sound off and did not contribute in any way to discussion). To correct this, I assigned the participating student to a new group.
One really cool thing about this class is that we made their individual exams open-note. That is, students could use any prepared, physical notes to aid them while taking the test. We (me and my advisor, Cissy Ballen) chose to allow this because we believe that biology is more than memorization and rather should be about application and synthesis of information. While students could use their notes, the questions on the exam were higher Bloom's Taxonomy level questions, requiring students to understand how to read and interpret phylogenetic trees.
From this class, we collected data concerning student perceptions of and their preparation habits for open-note exams, as compared to their previous experiences with closed-note exams in other classes. Specifically, we explored the following two research questions: (1a) How do students perceive open-note exams impact their exam scores, their anxiety, the amount they studied, and the amount their peers studied? (1b) How do these perceptions relate to performance outcomes? (2a) How do students prepare for open-note exams? (2b) How do these preparation methods relate to performance outcomes? Results demonstrate students perceived increased exam scores, decreased exam-anxiety, decreased study time spent personally and decreased study time spent by their peers for open-note exams as compared to past experiences with closed-note exams. Open-ended survey responses analyzed through first- and second-cycle analyses showed many students adapted their study habits by focusing on note preparation and broad conceptual understanding rather than rote memorization. Using linear mixed effects models to assess student performance, we found students who focused on note preparation and utilized outside resources outperformed students who did not report those study habits. As institutions shift towards flexible and scalable assessments that can be used in face-to-face or online environments, open-note exams are becoming increasingly common. While previous research has investigated whether open-note exams are comparable to closed-note exams in terms of student performance, none have focused on the differences in how students prepare for open-note exams. We conclude that, with intentional guidance from the instructor, open-note exams have the potential to promote effective study habits and reward higher-order thinking. Our results highlight how studies into student preparation for exams are an important part of understanding student performance.
In this course, students were assigned to small groups (ranging from 4 to 6 members) at the beginning of the semester and they worked together virtually - as this course was offered online only for spring 2021 a result of the COVID-19 pandemic - in breakout rooms during every lesson. For example, a typical class period included some lecture, with 3–4 iClicker questions/group discussions every 15 min, as well as a 20-min group activity. Students also took a group exam following individual examinations, allowing for students to confer with their group members over exam materials. This format worked pretty well, although I had a few students email me, explaining that no one in their online breakout rooms was really there (i.e., they had their cameras and sound off and did not contribute in any way to discussion). To correct this, I assigned the participating student to a new group.
One really cool thing about this class is that we made their individual exams open-note. That is, students could use any prepared, physical notes to aid them while taking the test. We (me and my advisor, Cissy Ballen) chose to allow this because we believe that biology is more than memorization and rather should be about application and synthesis of information. While students could use their notes, the questions on the exam were higher Bloom's Taxonomy level questions, requiring students to understand how to read and interpret phylogenetic trees.
From this class, we collected data concerning student perceptions of and their preparation habits for open-note exams, as compared to their previous experiences with closed-note exams in other classes. Specifically, we explored the following two research questions: (1a) How do students perceive open-note exams impact their exam scores, their anxiety, the amount they studied, and the amount their peers studied? (1b) How do these perceptions relate to performance outcomes? (2a) How do students prepare for open-note exams? (2b) How do these preparation methods relate to performance outcomes? Results demonstrate students perceived increased exam scores, decreased exam-anxiety, decreased study time spent personally and decreased study time spent by their peers for open-note exams as compared to past experiences with closed-note exams. Open-ended survey responses analyzed through first- and second-cycle analyses showed many students adapted their study habits by focusing on note preparation and broad conceptual understanding rather than rote memorization. Using linear mixed effects models to assess student performance, we found students who focused on note preparation and utilized outside resources outperformed students who did not report those study habits. As institutions shift towards flexible and scalable assessments that can be used in face-to-face or online environments, open-note exams are becoming increasingly common. While previous research has investigated whether open-note exams are comparable to closed-note exams in terms of student performance, none have focused on the differences in how students prepare for open-note exams. We conclude that, with intentional guidance from the instructor, open-note exams have the potential to promote effective study habits and reward higher-order thinking. Our results highlight how studies into student preparation for exams are an important part of understanding student performance.
