Genetic | Biology homework help

Case-studypage1.docx

BIOL 2416-1 – Extra Credit #2 – Reading Primary Research (up to 30 pts)

What is the purpose of this assignment?

Science and medicine are constantly changing, updating medications and procedures in response to the latest research. Knowing how scientists communicate through primary research article publication and developing the ability to quickly read and digest the key points of a paper are important skills for all STEM and health careers.

What is the assignment?

To earn any of this extra credit, you must do at least #1 OR #2. I would prefer you do all 3 parts. :)

Part 1. (15 points) Create a summary of the primary research article you were assigned and post a written or video summary about the article to your classmates in the Extra Credit #2 Discussion Forum in eCampus.

Part 2. (10 points) Provide feedback by writing up to two substantive (see below) replies to your classmates’ summaries (5 points per reply, so to earn the 10 points, you need to reply to two people).

Part 3. (5 points) Complete the post-activity reflection online form.

How does this group project help you develop Marketable Skills?

In this assignment, students will develop the following marketable skills:

Core Objectives	Marketable Skills
Communication	Employers want to hire individuals who demonstrate effective presentation skills by demonstrating ability to present ideas and information tailored to the appropriate audience and can facilitate discussion with others, including through active listening (which includes thoughtful reading) and providing constructive feedback and sharing relevant new ideas.
Teamwork	Employers want to hire individuals who demonstrate the ability to fulfill team expectations by accepting responsibility for their role, meeting deadlines and producing quality work that supports the team goal and are good at providing and receiving useful feedback using a constructive tone, providing evidence to support suggestions for change and acknowledging errors and making improvements to their own work when appropriate.

* This discussion will help you practice the specific marketable skills listed in bold in the table above.*

What do YOU need to do?

PART 1: Research Article – Summarizing Key Points (15 points)

Read the primary research article you were assigned (which relates directly to Chapter 16 on Cancer Genetics). Use the “Reading a Research Paper” guide to help you create a summary of the article in either written or video format (about 1/2 to 2/3 of a page or a 2 to 3-minute video), explaining what the article says and what the results mean. The audience is your classmates - write at college student level. Post your written or video summary in the Extra Credit #2 Discussion Forum in eCampus by 11:59 p.m. on Friday, December 5.

PART 2: Read and Reply – Providing Feedback (10 points)

Provide feedback by writing up to two substantive replies to your classmates’ summaries (5 points per reply, so to earn the 10 points, you need to reply to two people). This part can be done even if you did not complete Part 1. A substantive reply should include (A) comments about at least one thing you think the classmate did well, (B) at least one correction or concern you have about their summary AND (C) at least one question or follow-up thought you have about the research results (what are you left wondering about now that you’ve read this summary?). Post your replies in the Extra Credit #2 Discussion Forum in eCampus by 11:59 p.m. on Monday, December 8.

PART 3: Reflection – (5 points)

Complete the required survey by 11:59 p.m. on Tuesday, December 9 (must also be AFTER you read or write at least one reply in eCampus) reflecting on what skills you practiced and what you thought about the activity – make sure to read any replies to your post before you complete this reflection. You can do this part if you participated in parts 1 and 2 both, or only part 1 or only part 2.

image1.png

image2.jpeg

Case-studypage2.docx

Reading Scientific Literature – A Guide

PURPOSE: Freshman/Sophomore students are not expected to be an expert or to understand the details of the methods or results sections of a primary research article, but they are often given a research article and asked to “read” it and be prepared to discuss it for a class, an interview or even in mentoring situations. The goal of this thinking routine guide is to help you become familiar with journal articles in general and to help you develop a skill to summarize the key purpose and conclusions of any new primary research article just from spending 10-20 minutes reading just the abstract, introduction, and discussion.

OBJECTIVE: By the time you complete this thinking routine guide, you should have highlighted and added a few notes to your primary research article that allow you to quickly summarize the broad focus of the research the paper addresses, what the authors contributed, whether they had any statistics to back up their conclusions and the future outlook or meaning of their contribution to the field. Try it out and write or record a video summary of this article after following these steps – you’ll be surprised how much of an expert you sound like!

STEP 1: The title actually tells you something!

Read the title of the research paper you are analyzing. Can you translate even some of the title into understandable English? To help you do that, use this mental prompt: This article seems to have something to do with…

What to do: For your personal summary, write your brief description of what you think the topic or main idea of this article is going to be and attach it to the top of your copy. Don’t quote – summarize it in your own words.

STEP 2: Who did the work?

The authors’ names are listed after the title. The “first author” is the one who was responsible for the project overall and did the most work. We usually refer to the paper according to the first author’s last name (with et al. after the name the first time you use it). If there are only 2 authors, we refer to both (such as Smith and James)

The corresponding author is not always the first author. The last author (sometimes last 2 authors) are typically the supervising researchers, often called the PI (Principal Investigator) and are also typically the one who obtained the funding for the research. This is often the corresponding author since their lab location and contact information is less likely to change. NOTE: If you are ever looking for research articles online and can only access the abstract, never pay for the article without checking your school library for access first. If not available through your library, try emailing the corresponding author from your .edu email address – if you let them know you are a college student and your school doesn’t have access, they will almost always send you a PDF copy for free.

What to do: Highlight the last name of the first author of this paper if only one, both last names if two. Expand your statement in Step 1 to include the author(s) and title with the brief description, totaling about 2-3 sentences.

STEP 3: Finding the broad focus of the research.

The “abstract” is the summary that appears immediately after the authors names. Then the full-length research article begins, starting with several paragraphs of “introduction.” Typically, in both the abstract and the introduction, the authors give you some context of the general (broad) topic of their research, to which they have dedicated their career. Often, they do it in a sentence like this:

“_______ is poorly understood.”

“______ is largely unknown.”

“Science has never been able to figure out _________.”

What to do: Read through both the abstract and the introduction. As you read, look for one of these sentences to help you identify the broad focus of this research. Highlight any specific sentences you find that you think fit. Then, add to your Step 2 summary opening to add your explanation of what you think they are saying the important topic is (not a quote – what do YOU think it says they are studying and why?). This should be another 1-2 sentences.

STEP 4: What does this paper contribute to the field identified above?

Also in the abstract and/or introduction, the authors will indicate what NEW data THEY are presenting in THIS paper. It is sometimes stated more clearly at the start of the Discussion as well. Often there is a sentence like this:

“In this study, we provide evidence of….”

“Here we show that…”

“Our results demonstrate…”

What to do: Read through both the abstract and the introduction again. This time, read the start of the discussion as well. Look for a key sentence that identifies what these authors think they contributed to the field they have identified. Highlight any specific sentences you find that you think fit. Then, add 2-3 sentences to your summary with your own explanation of what you think these authors are saying they contributed (what does their data show or contribute to this field?). Remember to use the author last name as appropriate. NOTE: You may find it helpful to do STEP 5 at the same time as this step, so read through it before you begin this action.

STEP 5: Finding the future outlook and value

At the end of the abstract and in the Discussion (often the last paragraph of the entire paper), the authors restate what their have presented in this paper, and then they often cast a “future vision” of what usefulness this might be in future research or for humanity. The phrasing of this statement varies widely, so try to look for what they’re suggesting society, future researchers or doctors do with what they’ve reported here and/or where the research should go next.

What to do: Read through both the abstract and the entire discussion this time. Look for the key sentences that identify what these authors think is the long-lasting value of the work they have reported in this paper. Highlight any specific sentences you find that you think fit. Then, close out your summary with your own explanation of what you think they are saying is the value of this field of research to humanity (another 1-2 sentences). Make sure you mention what the application or use of the research they presented here will be.

STEP 6: Statistics and Meaning

Let’s talk about statistics. Most papers analyze their data with statistical methods and draw conclusions. This is math and there are rules. Without going into detailed analysis of the specific data they report, there are a few key things to know if you want to talk about the meaning of the results in a paper:

· “n” tells you the number of subjects or repeated trials. Bigger n is better. This is often called the sample size.

· There are also P values and confidence intervals (CI). [You must be good with converting decimals to percentages, and vice-versa, or you will screw this part up.]

· When comparing two groups, if P < 0.05 it means that there is sufficient evidence that the data from the two groups is significantly different. If P < 0.005, that indicates even more difference.

· If P>0.05, the conclusion is that the data does not show evidence of being significantly different.

· Sometimes there are control groups and experimental groups. For example in a clinical study if one group of patients receives a new drug and another group receives the placebo (similar looking pill or process that mimics the new drug to reduce accidental bias in perceived response). The group receiving the placebo is a control group for statistical analysis.

What to do: Skim through both the results and discussion, including the figure legends. If there are statistical analyses in the paper you are looking at, see if you can find n, P, and/or CI. Can you figure out if control groups were used and what is being compared? Don’t try to get everything from the results – focus on big pictures like whether they reported statistically significant changes in something or whether their sample size seems small or large. **If there are any relevant statistics, add a sentence between the contributions and the future outlook that briefly summarizes the data. If not, don’t add anything for this step. Note: Future outlook should be last no matter what.

Case-studypage1.docx

BIOL 2416-1 – Extra Credit #2 – Reading Primary Research (up to 30 pts)

What is the purpose of this assignment?

Science and medicine are constantly changing, updating medications and procedures in response to the latest research. Knowing how scientists communicate through primary research article publication and developing the ability to quickly read and digest the key points of a paper are important skills for all STEM and health careers.

What is the assignment?

To earn any of this extra credit, you must do at least #1 OR #2. I would prefer you do all 3 parts. :)

Part 1. (15 points) Create a summary of the primary research article you were assigned and post a written or video summary about the article to your classmates in the Extra Credit #2 Discussion Forum in eCampus.

Part 2. (10 points) Provide feedback by writing up to two substantive (see below) replies to your classmates’ summaries (5 points per reply, so to earn the 10 points, you need to reply to two people).

Part 3. (5 points) Complete the post-activity reflection online form.

How does this group project help you develop Marketable Skills?

In this assignment, students will develop the following marketable skills:

Core Objectives	Marketable Skills
Communication	Employers want to hire individuals who demonstrate effective presentation skills by demonstrating ability to present ideas and information tailored to the appropriate audience and can facilitate discussion with others, including through active listening (which includes thoughtful reading) and providing constructive feedback and sharing relevant new ideas.
Teamwork	Employers want to hire individuals who demonstrate the ability to fulfill team expectations by accepting responsibility for their role, meeting deadlines and producing quality work that supports the team goal and are good at providing and receiving useful feedback using a constructive tone, providing evidence to support suggestions for change and acknowledging errors and making improvements to their own work when appropriate.

* This discussion will help you practice the specific marketable skills listed in bold in the table above.*

What do YOU need to do?

PART 1: Research Article – Summarizing Key Points (15 points)

Read the primary research article you were assigned (which relates directly to Chapter 16 on Cancer Genetics). Use the “Reading a Research Paper” guide to help you create a summary of the article in either written or video format (about 1/2 to 2/3 of a page or a 2 to 3-minute video), explaining what the article says and what the results mean. The audience is your classmates - write at college student level. Post your written or video summary in the Extra Credit #2 Discussion Forum in eCampus by 11:59 p.m. on Friday, December 5.

PART 2: Read and Reply – Providing Feedback (10 points)

Provide feedback by writing up to two substantive replies to your classmates’ summaries (5 points per reply, so to earn the 10 points, you need to reply to two people). This part can be done even if you did not complete Part 1. A substantive reply should include (A) comments about at least one thing you think the classmate did well, (B) at least one correction or concern you have about their summary AND (C) at least one question or follow-up thought you have about the research results (what are you left wondering about now that you’ve read this summary?). Post your replies in the Extra Credit #2 Discussion Forum in eCampus by 11:59 p.m. on Monday, December 8.

PART 3: Reflection – (5 points)

Complete the required survey by 11:59 p.m. on Tuesday, December 9 (must also be AFTER you read or write at least one reply in eCampus) reflecting on what skills you practiced and what you thought about the activity – make sure to read any replies to your post before you complete this reflection. You can do this part if you participated in parts 1 and 2 both, or only part 1 or only part 2.

image1.png

image2.jpeg

Case-studypage2.docx

Reading Scientific Literature – A Guide

PURPOSE: Freshman/Sophomore students are not expected to be an expert or to understand the details of the methods or results sections of a primary research article, but they are often given a research article and asked to “read” it and be prepared to discuss it for a class, an interview or even in mentoring situations. The goal of this thinking routine guide is to help you become familiar with journal articles in general and to help you develop a skill to summarize the key purpose and conclusions of any new primary research article just from spending 10-20 minutes reading just the abstract, introduction, and discussion.

OBJECTIVE: By the time you complete this thinking routine guide, you should have highlighted and added a few notes to your primary research article that allow you to quickly summarize the broad focus of the research the paper addresses, what the authors contributed, whether they had any statistics to back up their conclusions and the future outlook or meaning of their contribution to the field. Try it out and write or record a video summary of this article after following these steps – you’ll be surprised how much of an expert you sound like!

STEP 1: The title actually tells you something!

Read the title of the research paper you are analyzing. Can you translate even some of the title into understandable English? To help you do that, use this mental prompt: This article seems to have something to do with…

What to do: For your personal summary, write your brief description of what you think the topic or main idea of this article is going to be and attach it to the top of your copy. Don’t quote – summarize it in your own words.

STEP 2: Who did the work?

The authors’ names are listed after the title. The “first author” is the one who was responsible for the project overall and did the most work. We usually refer to the paper according to the first author’s last name (with et al. after the name the first time you use it). If there are only 2 authors, we refer to both (such as Smith and James)

The corresponding author is not always the first author. The last author (sometimes last 2 authors) are typically the supervising researchers, often called the PI (Principal Investigator) and are also typically the one who obtained the funding for the research. This is often the corresponding author since their lab location and contact information is less likely to change. NOTE: If you are ever looking for research articles online and can only access the abstract, never pay for the article without checking your school library for access first. If not available through your library, try emailing the corresponding author from your .edu email address – if you let them know you are a college student and your school doesn’t have access, they will almost always send you a PDF copy for free.

What to do: Highlight the last name of the first author of this paper if only one, both last names if two. Expand your statement in Step 1 to include the author(s) and title with the brief description, totaling about 2-3 sentences.

STEP 3: Finding the broad focus of the research.

The “abstract” is the summary that appears immediately after the authors names. Then the full-length research article begins, starting with several paragraphs of “introduction.” Typically, in both the abstract and the introduction, the authors give you some context of the general (broad) topic of their research, to which they have dedicated their career. Often, they do it in a sentence like this:

“_______ is poorly understood.”

“______ is largely unknown.”

“Science has never been able to figure out _________.”

What to do: Read through both the abstract and the introduction. As you read, look for one of these sentences to help you identify the broad focus of this research. Highlight any specific sentences you find that you think fit. Then, add to your Step 2 summary opening to add your explanation of what you think they are saying the important topic is (not a quote – what do YOU think it says they are studying and why?). This should be another 1-2 sentences.

STEP 4: What does this paper contribute to the field identified above?

Also in the abstract and/or introduction, the authors will indicate what NEW data THEY are presenting in THIS paper. It is sometimes stated more clearly at the start of the Discussion as well. Often there is a sentence like this:

“In this study, we provide evidence of….”

“Here we show that…”

“Our results demonstrate…”

What to do: Read through both the abstract and the introduction again. This time, read the start of the discussion as well. Look for a key sentence that identifies what these authors think they contributed to the field they have identified. Highlight any specific sentences you find that you think fit. Then, add 2-3 sentences to your summary with your own explanation of what you think these authors are saying they contributed (what does their data show or contribute to this field?). Remember to use the author last name as appropriate. NOTE: You may find it helpful to do STEP 5 at the same time as this step, so read through it before you begin this action.

STEP 5: Finding the future outlook and value

At the end of the abstract and in the Discussion (often the last paragraph of the entire paper), the authors restate what their have presented in this paper, and then they often cast a “future vision” of what usefulness this might be in future research or for humanity. The phrasing of this statement varies widely, so try to look for what they’re suggesting society, future researchers or doctors do with what they’ve reported here and/or where the research should go next.

What to do: Read through both the abstract and the entire discussion this time. Look for the key sentences that identify what these authors think is the long-lasting value of the work they have reported in this paper. Highlight any specific sentences you find that you think fit. Then, close out your summary with your own explanation of what you think they are saying is the value of this field of research to humanity (another 1-2 sentences). Make sure you mention what the application or use of the research they presented here will be.

STEP 6: Statistics and Meaning

Let’s talk about statistics. Most papers analyze their data with statistical methods and draw conclusions. This is math and there are rules. Without going into detailed analysis of the specific data they report, there are a few key things to know if you want to talk about the meaning of the results in a paper:

· “n” tells you the number of subjects or repeated trials. Bigger n is better. This is often called the sample size.

· There are also P values and confidence intervals (CI). [You must be good with converting decimals to percentages, and vice-versa, or you will screw this part up.]

· When comparing two groups, if P < 0.05 it means that there is sufficient evidence that the data from the two groups is significantly different. If P < 0.005, that indicates even more difference.

· If P>0.05, the conclusion is that the data does not show evidence of being significantly different.

· Sometimes there are control groups and experimental groups. For example in a clinical study if one group of patients receives a new drug and another group receives the placebo (similar looking pill or process that mimics the new drug to reduce accidental bias in perceived response). The group receiving the placebo is a control group for statistical analysis.

What to do: Skim through both the results and discussion, including the figure legends. If there are statistical analyses in the paper you are looking at, see if you can find n, P, and/or CI. Can you figure out if control groups were used and what is being compared? Don’t try to get everything from the results – focus on big pictures like whether they reported statistically significant changes in something or whether their sample size seems small or large. **If there are any relevant statistics, add a sentence between the contributions and the future outlook that briefly summarizes the data. If not, don’t add anything for this step. Note: Future outlook should be last no matter what.