Innovating Food Microbiology lab classes

Wilma Hazeleger

Laboratory of Food Microbiology

Background

Increasing student numbers

2

Challenges lab classes

● Lab space

● Differences in starting level

● Staff availability

Goals

● Stimulate self-activity

● Learning outcomes

● Reduce time to explain basics

Innovation of lab classes Food Microbiology

Food Microbiology (BSc-2)

● 3 weeks -> 2 weeks of lab classes

● Digital assignments

● Lab clips

3

# s

tudents

Food Microbiology, in silico experiments

Each assignment: 2-4 h

● Microscopic ID of fungi

● Variability in results (statistical data analysis)

● Thermal resistance

● Molecular ID of bacteria

● Disinfectants

4

In silico experiment; Thermal resistance

5

6

In silico experiment; Q and (multiple) A

7

In silico experiment; outline experiment

8

In silico experiment; results, plate counts

9

In silico experiment; interpretation

10

In silico experiment; calculations

Evaluations per digital assignment: time

11

How much time did it take to complete the assignment?

Summary evaluations digital assignments

12

Average for each quality indicator (scores 1-5)

Requirement average1 Time (2-4 h) OK2 Clear 3.43 Manageable 3.44 No guessing 3.45 Understood 4.06 Accurate and relevant 3.77 Variety 3.68 Visuals 3.99 Fun to work on 3.410 Learned much 3.7

n=109

Innovation of lab classes Advanced FM

Advanced Food Microbiology (MSc-1)

● Design preservation experiment

● Different starting level students

● Design day 1, start experiment day 2

● Not enough time for feedback, preparations

● Labbuddy

● Design tool (ExperD)

● Web lab manual

13

59

6772 74

8893

100

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

stu

dents

Adv Food Microbiology, web lab manual

Web manual

Protocols

● Prepare mode

● Work mode

● QR code, easy access with tablet or smartphone

Including lab clips

14

Web lab manual: lactic acid bacteria

15

Web lab manual: lactic acid bacteria

16

Web lab manual: lactic acid bacteria

17

Adv Food Microbiology, design tool: ExperD

Design preservation of raw food

● Choose food, treatment, storage temp, mo, ....

18

ExperD:

● Brush up knowledge, Q & A, feedback

● Explanation experiment and tool

● Design page, drag and drop

● Choices and feedback

● Link with web lab manual

● List items needed

● Start experiment

ExperD: introduction

19

ExperD: design page; start: drag and drop

20

ExperD: design sheet; design experiment

21

ExperD: design sheet; design

22

ExperD: design sheet; list needed media

23

Output shopping list media, equipment

24

Summary in Excel-> media kitchen

Group 1

Group 2

Group 3

yes

yes

yes

After permission: start experiment next day

25

Evaluation ExperD and WebLM (n=78)

26

Question # Question

1.1 ExperD guided me through the design smoothly.1.2 ExperD enabled me to set priorities for this experiment.1.3 ExperD supported efficient to design of my experiment.2 ExperD stimulated collaboration within our group.3 I found the information and feedback in ExperD helpful.4 While using ExperD, we could work more independently than without.5 ExperD should be applied in other experiments as well.6.1 The difference between the prepare mode and work mode was clear.6.2 Prepare mode and work mode helped me to understand the experiments better.6.3 Prepare mode and work mode made the experiments easier to perform.7 While using WebLM I often had to ask the supervisor for help.8 I prefer a paper copy of the protocols above a digital version. 9 I did use the option to watch protocols on the phone or tablet in the lab.10 WebLM should be applied to the other protocols (e.g. pathogens) as well.

4.34.0

4.34.1

4.4

3.9 4.0 3.9 4.1 4.0

2.92.5 2.6

4.1

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

1.1 1.2 1.3 2 3 4 5 6.1 6.2 6.3 7 8 9 10

Avera

ge

Question

Average per question ExperD (1-5) and webLM (6-10)

Evaluation WebLM and ExperD (n=78)

27

Question # Question

1.1 ExperD guided me through the design smoothly.1.2 ExperD enabled me to set priorities for this experiment.1.3 ExperD supported efficient to design of my experiment.2 ExperD stimulated collaboration within our group.3 I found the information and feedback in ExperD helpful.4 While using ExperD, we could work more independently than without.5 ExperD should be applied in other experiments as well.6.1 The difference between the prepare mode and work mode was clear.6.2 Prepare mode and work mode helped me to understand the experiments better.6.3 Prepare mode and work mode made the experiments easier to perform.7 While using WebLM I often had to ask the supervisor for help.8 I prefer a paper copy of the protocols above a digital version. 9 I did use the option to watch protocols on the phone or tablet in the lab.10 WebLM should be applied to the other protocols (e.g. pathogens) as well.

Summary result of innovations

28

● Able to cope with larger student groups

● Lab classes two weeks instead of three

● Two consecutive groups, planning easier

● Less lab space needed, less apparatus, less staff

Staff vs students

29

students

staff

Summary result of innovations

30

● Able to cope with larger student groups

● Lab classes two weeks instead of three

● Two consecutive groups, planning easier

● Less lab space needed, less apparatus, less staff

● Fewer low cognitive questions

● Digital assignments highly appreciated

● Stimulates collaboration within groups

● Approval to order media automatically

● Media easily ordered and distributed

● Use in other courses as well

Acknowledgements

LabBuddy® , Kryt B.V.

Koos van der Kolk

Tineke Bijl

31

WU

Ida Jongenburger

Heidy den Besten

Martine Reij

Gerrieke van Middendorp

Marcel Zwietering

Tjakko Abee

Judith Straver

Marcel Tempelaars

Judith Wolkers

Gerard Moerland

Philippe Puylaert

Lisette Nitsch

www.labbuddy.net

CBS-KNAW Fungal

Biodiversity Centre

Thanks for your attention!

32