Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 Feb 28;21(1):21.1.6.
doi: 10.1128/jmbe.v21i1.2005. eCollection 2020.

Facilitating Growth through Frustration: Using Genomics Research in a Course-Based Undergraduate Research Experience

David Lopatto  1 Anne G Rosenwald  2 Justin R DiAngelo  3 Amy T Hark  4 Matthew Skerritt  5 Matthew Wawersik  6 Anna K Allen  7 Consuelo Alvarez  8 Sara Anderson  9 Cindy Arrigo  10 Andrew Arsham  11 Daron Barnard  12 Christopher Bazinet  13 James E J Bedard  14 Indrani Bose  15 John M Braverman  16 Martin G Burg  17 Rebecca C Burgess  18 Paula Croonquist  19 Chunguang Du  20 Sondra Dubowsky  21 Heather Eisler  22 Matthew A Escobar  23 Michael Foulk  24 Emily Furbee  25 Thomas Giarla  26 Rivka L Glaser  18 Anya L Goodman  27 Yuying Gosser  28 Adam Haberman  29 Charles Hauser  30 Shan Hays  31 Carina E Howell  32 Jennifer Jemc  33 M Logan Johnson  34 Christopher J Jones  35 Lisa Kadlec  36 Jacob D Kagey  37 Kimberly L Keller  38 Jennifer Kennell  39 S Catherine Silver Key  40 Adam J Kleinschmit  41 Melissa Kleinschmit  41 Nighat P Kokan  42 Olga Ruiz Kopp  43 Meg M Laakso  44 Judith Leatherman  45 Lindsey J Long  46 Mollie Manier  47 Juan C Martinez-Cruzado  48 Luis F Matos  49 Amie Jo McClellan  50 Gerard McNeil  51 Evan Merkhofer  52 Vida Mingo  53 Hemlata Mistry  54 Elizabeth Mitchell  21 Nathan T Mortimer  55 Debaditya Mukhopadhyay  56 Jennifer Leigh Myka  57 Alexis Nagengast  58 Paul Overvoorde  59 Don Paetkau  60 Leocadia Paliulis  61 Susan Parrish  62 Mary Lai Preuss  63 James V Price  43 Nicholas A Pullen  45 Catherine Reinke  64 Dennis Revie  65 Srebrenka Robic  66 Jennifer A Roecklein-Canfield  67 Michael R Rubin  68 Takrima Sadikot  69 Jamie Siders Sanford  70 Maria Santisteban  71 Kenneth Saville  72 Stephanie Schroeder  63 Christopher D Shaffer  73 Karim A Sharif  74 Diane E Sklensky  75 Chiyedza Small  76 Mary Smith  77 Sheryl Smith  78 Rebecca Spokony  79 Aparna Sreenivasan  80 Joyce Stamm  81 Rachel Sterne-Marr  26 Katherine C Teeter  82 Justin Thackeray  83 Jeffrey S Thompson  84 Stephanie Toering Peters  85 Melanie Van Stry  75 Norma Velazquez-Ulloa  86 Cindy Wolfe  87 James Youngblom  88 Brian Yowler  89 Leming Zhou  90 Janie Brennan  91 Jeremy Buhler  92 Wilson Leung  73 Laura K Reed  93 Sarah C R Elgin  73
Affiliations

Facilitating Growth through Frustration: Using Genomics Research in a Course-Based Undergraduate Research Experience

David Lopatto et al. J Microbiol Biol Educ. .

Abstract

A hallmark of the research experience is encountering difficulty and working through those challenges to achieve success. This ability is essential to being a successful scientist, but replicating such challenges in a teaching setting can be difficult. The Genomics Education Partnership (GEP) is a consortium of faculty who engage their students in a genomics Course-Based Undergraduate Research Experience (CURE). Students participate in genome annotation, generating gene models using multiple lines of experimental evidence. Our observations suggested that the students' learning experience is continuous and recursive, frequently beginning with frustration but eventually leading to success as they come up with defendable gene models. In order to explore our "formative frustration" hypothesis, we gathered data from faculty via a survey, and from students via both a general survey and a set of student focus groups. Upon analyzing these data, we found that all three datasets mentioned frustration and struggle, as well as learning and better understanding of the scientific process. Bioinformatics projects are particularly well suited to the process of iteration and refinement because iterations can be performed quickly and are inexpensive in both time and money. Based on these findings, we suggest that a dynamic of "formative frustration" is an important aspect for a successful CURE.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

FIGURE 1
FIGURE 1
The GEP mirror of the UCSC Genome Browser for Drosophila mojavensis (Sept 2008 GEP/dot assembly), with lines of evidence supporting the presence of a protein-coding gene in this region. The genome sequence is shown in the top line (Improved Sequence), with multiple lines of evidence supporting the presence of a gene mapped against that sequence. There are apparent contradictions in these evidence tracks. The BLASTx alignment track indicates that the region at 93000–12000 of D. mojavensis shows significant similarity to protein sequences for two isoforms of the D. melanogaster gene Sox102F (Sequence Homology track). Computer-based gene predictors indicate a gene in this region (Gene Predictions tracks), but vary on the number, size, and location of predicted exons. RNA-Seq data appear to support the presence of three or four exons, yet TopHat and Cufflinks differ on the number and location of intron splice sites. The region from 7500 to 8000 might contain an exon of Sox102F (predicted by N-SCAN), or it might be a separate gene (predicted by Genscan and SGP) as there is some RNA-Seq data, but little or no conservation is indicated in this region. Students must reconcile these differences to generate the best-supported gene models for this region of the D. mojavensis genome.
FIGURE 2
FIGURE 2
Faculty observe that setbacks in the research process promote student learning. Results from NVivo analysis of comments from the Formative Failure faculty survey (Appendix 2) on the effects on student learning from course setbacks (survey question 9.D: problems affecting all students in the class, N=161) and student setbacks (survey question 10.D: problems encountered by individual students, N=134). The percent of faculty responses that were positive (blue), negative (orange), or neutral (no effect; grey) are shown. GEP = Genomics Education Partnership.
FIGURE 3
FIGURE 3
Faculty are more likely to let their students risk failure in GEP research projects than in wet bench or field work lab courses and research projects. Faculty were asked how likely they were to let students fail in performance of wet bench lab work (coursework and research), field work (coursework or research), and GEP research activities. The degree of willingness to risk failure was evaluated as 1 (very likely) to 3 (not at all). Note that many GEP faculty members do not do field work, so the number of responses in that category is lower. (Percentages do not sum to 100%, as “not applicable” responses are not shown.) GEP = Genomics Education Partnership.
FIGURE 4
FIGURE 4
Genomics-based CUREs can support an iterative learning process. A collaborative Learning Environment (1) supports the entire process, which includes a defined learning objective (2), a formative strategy (3), and iterative experimentation (4). Adapted with permission from (10).

References

    1. Dewey J. How we think: a restatement of the relation of reflective thinking to the educative process. Boston: Houghton Mifflin; Boston, MA: 1933.
    1. Csikszentmihalyi M. Flow: the psychology of optimal experience. Harper Perennial; New York, NY: 1990.
    1. Amsel A. The role of frustrative nonreward in noncontinuous reward situations. Psych Bull. 1958;55(2):102–119. doi: 10.1037/h0043125. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Amsel A. Frustration theory: many years later. Psych Bull. 1992;112(3):396–399. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.112.3.396. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Arkes HR, Garske JP. Psychological theories of motivation. Thomson Brooks/Cole; 1982.

LinkOut - more resources