SUBJECT: Open labs
DATE: 4/95

Hi Labbers! Several years ago, we went to an open lab system for our non-
major biology course. We serve upwards of 1200 students a quarter in two
labs that hold 24 students each, so we had to find a way to accomodate
everyone. I would be interested in finding out how wide-spread the use of
open labs is. Do any of you know of other schools that use this? Thanks!
********************************************************************
Gail Schiffer gschiffe@kscmail.Kennesaw.Edu
Biology, Kennesaw State College 404-423-6167
P.O. Box 444, Marietta GA 30061 Fax: 404-423-6625


A few of you have asked for info on the open lab format.
A few years ago, our college was faced with the problem of serving a
growing student population with limited lab space, so two of the faculty
members developed an open schedule lab format that has been very
successful for us. Briefly, labs are open 35 - 60 hours a week (depending
on the number of lecture sections), and students may attend lab any time
during those hours that the lab is not full. Students check in and out, so
we have a record of their attendance. The labs are designed to be self-
instructive -- students are given directions and requested to answer
questions as they progrss. Materials are available to them from stations
around the room, and the students can usually take the materials back to
the desk for use. Faculty serve as lab instructors, answering questions
and interacting with the students. In recent years, we have adapted most
of our labs to make them investigative in nature.
There are obvious pros and cons to this format. The pros include
efficient use of space and materials as well as flexibility for both
student and faculty schedules (ours is a comuter campus). Students who
need extra time in lab can have it, for example, and the number of hours
faculty spend in the lab can be varied according to other aspects of
their load. We have also found that this fosters a modicum of independence
on the part of some of our students (no, I did not say all).
The primary con is that faculty members no longer have full control
over the experience their students have in lab. We faculty do not always
agree on everything, and we do not always know whether a student got the
kind of help we would have provided.
Using an open lab format requires a certain critical mass of
students -- it is not appropriate for a course with only 300 students. But
it has been a reasonable solution for us. I would be happy to answer any
questions.
********************************************************************
Gail Schiffer gschiffe@kscmail.Kennesaw.Edu
Biology, Kennesaw State College 404-423-6167
P.O. Box 444, Marietta GA 30061 Fax: 404-423-6625
*********************************************************************

For what it is worth, we had open labs when I arrived here, but have
abandoned them. The students were only half-heartedly looking at things,
or signing in and not really doing the labs. Of course, we did not have
faculty as supervisors, but rather had much less-experienced GTA's. The
individual carrels made the lab an unfriendly setting, and one could not
even see a student on the other side of the room. The carrels are gone
and we have scheduled labs now. By holding labs at night, we have solved
the space problem for the time being.
A concern I would have for open labs is that they would preclude group
work, which often permits more replication. Students have too much
experience at running experiments with insufficient replication. And
employers are telling us they want students who know how to make group
work succeed. How are you dealing with this problem?
***********************************
Janice M. Glime
Department of Biological Sciences
Michigan Technological University
Houghton, MI 49931-1295
jmglime@mtu.edu
906-487-2546
FAX 906-487-3167


In response to Janice Glime's question regarding open lab vs.
group work in scheduled labs, we run several experiments in
regularily scheduled lab sessions where students work in "teams"
to collect data. Replication is important. At the end of the
week, we compose a master data sheet which is dulpicated and
given to each student (we also make the data sheet available as a
computer spreadsheet for those students interested in using a
computer for data analysis). Each student is expected to
calculate the means and std. error for each treatment group
and run standard statistical tests. they then use this
information to write a lab report.

The advantage of this approach is that a fairly large data base
can be obtained, and meaningful interpretation of the results can
be made rather than attempting to make sense out of single
observations. Students also learn about biological variability
and designing experiments with adequate controls.

Richard Walker
Biological Sciences
Univ. of Calgary


Janice is right that students (and sometimes faculty) have a tendency
to take open labs less seriously than closed ones. Because I stress lab
work heavily in the classroom, my students learn quickly that they had
better know the labs well, but it does take dedication on the part of the
classroom instructor. Many of us also take a pro-active stance in lab --
roaming the room and asking students questions about what they are doing
and what kind of results they are getting. A passive lab instructor
sitting at the front desk is death to these labs.
I have less concern about group work, however, for two reasons. The
first is that, for some labs, we have a set-up similar to the one Richard
describes, where data is pooled and shared. The second is that many
students (by no means all) form their own groups. Again, I encourage this
in class, but I do not have a mechanism for making them happen.
********************************************************************
Gail Schiffer gschiffe@kscmail.Kennesaw.Edu
Biology, Kennesaw State College 404-423-6167
P.O. Box 444, Marietta GA 30061 Fax: 404-423-6625
*********************************************************************


Hello, biolabbers!

I've been following this discussion of open labs with interest, and with two
opposing opinions. My first exposure to college biology was in a course at
Purdue with open labs, and it was great for me. Course, I was fairly highly
motivated and interested, but I've always had a soft spot for open lab courses
since that experience.

Now, however, my unmotivated, science-hating niece is in a biology course with
open labs at Kansas State, and now I see the other side. I don't know the
details of how that course works, but she is sliding by not really doing
distasteful (to her) activities, not having personal contact with any
TA or other instructor in the labs. A major part of the problem is her
attitude and lack of adaptation to college study requirements, but she also
isn't getting any stimulation or one-on-one contact that might help her to
see the importance and beauty of biology.

I've come to the conclusion from my own teaching experience that nonmajors
especially need some hands-on, active, and, yes, guided lab experiences if
they are to develop any enthusiasm for and appreciation of our field. And I
would be interested in hearing how the courses with open labs accomplish
this. It's hard enough in a "traditional" lab where students have direct
contact with the instructor.

Joy Perry
Univ. of Wisconsin Center - Fox Valley
joyperry@uwcmail.uwc.edu
(414)832-2653


The concerns voiced on student attitudes in an open lab setting
reflect the primary drawback to the system. We have used open labs for the
general education (read "non-major") student fairly successsfully for the
past eleven or twelve years, but it takes dedication on the part of the
faculty to make it work.
All faculty member must a) make lab an important part of their course
by talking about it and emphasizing it in class and b) decide to make
their turn in the lab a good experience for the students who are there. I
find, for example, that there are students I see regularly in the lab at
the same time each week. I get to know them, even if they are not "mine",
and I find they can get just as turned on by the labs as my majors in a
closed lab. I circulate among the students, asking questions and giving
practical advice. A number of my colleagues do likewise, and I know my
students are getting a good experience with them.
The "problem children" are those who need close supervision to
make sure they do the lab -- the students who are there only to get a
piece of paper with their name on it. I am not sure they get much more out
of a closed lab than an open one.
In both cases, unless you are lucky enough to have your own lecture
students in lab, you have to rely on your fellow faculty members or TA's
to give your students good lab experiences.
The best open lab experience can never match the best closed lab
experiences, and I would bet that most of my 20 colleagues would go back to
closed labs if we could. I certainly would not recommend them for
majors courses or where there are fewer than 200-300 students in a course.
On the other hand, we have a situation of a large subscription course
sequence with very limited facilities, time, and resouces -- and they have
worked reasonably well for us.
********************************************************************
Gail Schiffer gschiffe@kscmail.Kennesaw.Edu
Biology, Kennesaw State College 404-423-6167
P.O. Box 444, Marietta GA 30061 Fax: 404-423-6625

---

Biolab Home Page