@article{marion_gardner_parks_2012, title={Multiweek cell culture project for use in upper-level biology laboratories}, volume={36}, ISSN={["1043-4046"]}, DOI={10.1152/advan.00080.2011}, abstractNote={ This article describes a laboratory protocol for a multiweek project piloted in a new upper-level biology laboratory (BIO 426) using cell culture techniques. Human embryonic kidney-293 cells were used, and several culture media and supplements were identified for students to design their own experiments. Treatments included amino acids, EGF, caffeine, epinephrine, heavy metals, and FBS. Students researched primary literature to determine their experimental variables, made their own solutions, and treated their cells over a period of 2 wk. Before this, a sterile technique laboratory was developed to teach students how to work with the cells and minimize contamination. Students designed their experiments, mixed their solutions, seeded their cells, and treated them with their control and experimental media. Students had the choice of manipulating a number of variables, including incubation times, exposure to treatment media, and temperature. At the end of the experiment, students observed the effects of their treatment, harvested and dyed their cells, counted relative cell numbers in control and treatment flasks, and determined the ratio of living to dead cells using a hemocytometer. At the conclusion of the experiment, students presented their findings in a poster presentation. This laboratory can be expanded or adapted to include additional cell lines and treatments. The ability to design and implement their own experiments has been shown to increase student engagement in the biology-related laboratory activities as well as develop the critical thinking skills needed for independent research. }, number={2}, journal={ADVANCES IN PHYSIOLOGY EDUCATION}, author={Marion, Rebecca E. and Gardner, Grant E. and Parks, Lisa D.}, year={2012}, month={Jun}, pages={154–157} }
 @article{jones_gardner_taylor_wiebe_forrester_2011, title={Conceptualizing Magnification and Scale: The Roles of Spatial Visualization and Logical Thinking}, volume={41}, ISSN={0157-244X 1573-1898}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11165-010-9169-2}, DOI={10.1007/s11165-010-9169-2}, number={3}, journal={Research in Science Education}, publisher={Springer Science and Business Media LLC}, author={Jones, M. Gail and Gardner, Grant and Taylor, Amy R. and Wiebe, Eric and Forrester, Jennifer}, year={2011}, month={May}, pages={357–368} }
 @article{gardner_jones_2011, title={Perceptions and Practices: Biology graduate teaching assistants' framing of a controversial socioscientific issue}, volume={33}, ISSN={["1464-5289"]}, DOI={10.1080/09500691003743244}, abstractNote={Graduate teaching assistants (GTAs) are gaining increasing responsibility for the instruction of undergraduate science students, yet little is known about their beliefs about science pedagogy or subsequent classroom practices. This study looked at six GTAs who were primary instructors in an introductory biology laboratory course. Teaching assistants taught a lesson about the potential social, health, and environmental impacts of genetically modified crops. Through classroom observations and in‐depth interviews, the researchers examined how instructors chose to frame their lessons and what GTAs perceived as important for students to know about this particular socioscientific issue (SSI). Results showed a disconnect between the relatively mature conceptualizations of effective SSI instruction that emerged during interviews and classroom practice.}, number={8}, journal={INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENCE EDUCATION}, author={Gardner, Grant and Jones, Gail}, year={2011}, pages={1031–1054} }
 @article{gardner_jones_taylor_forrester_robertson_2010, title={Students' Risk Perceptions of Nanotechnology Applications: Implications for science education}, volume={32}, ISSN={["0950-0693"]}, DOI={10.1080/09500690903331035}, abstractNote={Scientific literacy as a goal of a science education reform remains an important discourse in the research literature and is a key component of students’ understanding and acceptance of emergent technologies like nanotechnology. This manuscript focuses on undergraduate engineering students’ perceptions of the risks and benefits posed by nanotechnology as an important component of scientific literacy. Specifically, this study examined the perceived risk of nanotechnology of a group of American students (N = 102) in three material science engineering courses focusing on nanotechnology. Students completed a survey of risk perception and a sub‐sample were interviewed (n = 21). It was found that perceptions of risks and benefits of nanotechnology tended to be closely tied to specific groups of applications including common consumer products, health‐related products, and advanced technological applications. The intersection of scientific application and perception is discussed in the context of science education curriculum considerations.}, number={14}, journal={INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENCE EDUCATION}, author={Gardner, Grant and Jones, Gail and Taylor, Amy and Forrester, Jennifer and Robertson, Laura}, year={2010}, pages={1951–1969} }
 @article{gardner_jones_2009, title={Bacteria buster: Testing antibiotic properties of silver nanoparticles}, volume={71}, DOI={10.2307/27669416}, abstractNote={[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED] Nanoscale science and engineering are disciplines that examine the unique behaviors and properties of materials that emerge at the size range of 1 to 100 nanometers (a billionth of a meter). Nanobiotechnology is a sub-discipline of nanoscience that has arisen more recently. It refers to harnessing unique behaviors and properties at the nanoscale to manipulate materials for applications in biology (NNI, 2001). Already nanobiotechnology is impacting the fields of healthcare and biomedical engineering, and promises to be critical in advances in other related fields. Even though it spans multiple science disciplines, the abstract nature of nanoscience in general can challenge instructors to find practical ways to teach about this concept in the classroom (for additional ideas see, Nanoscale Science: Activities for Grades 6-12). This article describes a quick and simple laboratory investigation utilizing nanotechnology in a biological context. It is most appropriate for high school or undergraduate students. It addresses biology content standards in both personal and community health as well as the future challenges of science and technology to society. This activity requires a limited amount of materials and yields visible results. The investigation has two basic objectives: 1) make students aware of nanotechnology and its potential biological interface, and 2) have students examine and explore the accuracy of claims made about emerging technologies. The activity itself is something that we believe many instructors will recognize, but we hope that our proposed approach will offer a new perspective on an old activity. * Bacteria & Silver Nanoparticles The misuse and overuse of antibiotics in today's society have lead to the evolution of dangerous new strains of antibiotic-resistant bacteria. For example, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) outbreaks have become a concern in many hospitals due to the microbes' resistance to all but the most potent antibiotics (Gupta & Silver, 1998). Outbreaks of antibiotic-resistance bacteria fuel incentives to develop new effective bacteriacidal agents (Morones et al., 2005). Silver is toxic to a wide range of microorganisms including many that cause human disease (Liau et al., 1997). Silver nanoparticles are especially potent when reduced to the size range of 5-to-50 nanometer clusters. Studies with silver nanoparticles in this size range have been shown to kill common bacteria such as E. coli, V. cholera, and S. typhus (Morones et al., 2005). The effectiveness of silver as an antibiotic has already led to its widespread use in wound dressings and catheters (Margaret et al., 2006; Samuel & Guggenbichler, 2004). Despite the effectiveness of silver as an antimicrobial agent, questions remain as to whether microbes like bacteria will develop resistance to silver (similar to that seen with modern antibiotics). Whether bacteria could develop resistance to silver nanoparticles will depend on the mechanism by which silver works to kill bacteria. Numerous models have been suggested including deactivation of certain bacterial enzymes, disruption of gene replication, and limitation of cellular membrane function (summarized in Morones et al., 2005). However, the true mechanism for silver's antibacterial action remains uncertain. Nanoparticle silver is already being used in numerous antibiotic applications, just a few of which are listed below (Gupta Silver, 1998): * Hospital surfaces and sterile instrumentation * Agricultural sites (such as chicken farms) to reduce infectious agents in the environment * Sterilize recycled water aboard the MIR space station * Medical wrappings to treat burns and various infections * Silver-threaded socks and underwear to reduce odor caused by bacteria. As with all new technology, the potential benefits might be associated with risks. …}, number={4}, journal={American Biology Teacher}, author={Gardner, G. E. and Jones, M. G.}, year={2009}, pages={231–234} }
 @article{gardner_jones_ferzli_2009, title={Popular media in the biology classroom: viewing popular science skeptically}, volume={71}, DOI={10.2307/20565328}, abstractNote={Biology is not an opinion subject. ... It's a facts-based subject. If this had been a philosophy class, I wouldn't have said anything. (Spies, 2008) The above statement was made by a senior in a university embryology course in response to her teacher's suggestion that fetuses should be aborted if amniocentesis showed the presence of trisomy-21. The student, who happened to have a sibling with Down syndrome, was appalled at the comment, and reported the instructor to the Dean of the college because she felt that instructor opinions had no place in the science classroom. In response, the professor (with 35 years of teaching experience) later admitted that he offers this opinion as a means for stimulating class discussion, and if faced with the same situation would not likely find the decision as clear-cut as he might imply in his lecture. Accusations and justifications aside, it is the student's explanation of why this statement was offensive in this particular classroom setting that begs consideration. Where did the aforementioned lesson go wrong? Why was there a disconnect between the instructor's intent and the student's interpretation? The authors of this article argue that this example elucidates a disturbing trend in students' views of the nature of science (in this case, in the context of biology) as a body of facts. Recent science education research and reform documents strongly disagree with this perspective and stress the need for teaching students to appreciate the nature of the scientific enterprise and its social ramifications. It can be argued that the responsibilities of biology educators to their students extend far beyond the delivery of science content. Educators are also charged with ensuring that students do not temporarily memorize the information, but actively integrate it into their daily lives. Personal integration of science content should prepare students to evaluate the reliability and merit of this information outside of the classroom (Laugksch, 2000). At the K-12 level, the National Science Education Standards support this educational goal as one component of scientific literacy by stating that, "everyone needs to be able to engage intelligently in public discourse and debate about important issues that involve science and technology" (NRC, 1996, p. 1). In addition, the former Executive Director of the National Science Teachers Association (NSTA), Gerry Wheeler, was quoted as saying, "We have in this country a major crisis of people listening to people they feel comfortable with [rather than] listening to a variety of groups and critically thinking through their messages" (MacDonald, 2008). For the general public, information regarding science topics is often obtained from media sources such as the Internet, television, or newspapers (NSF, 2006). In recognition of this, it would be beneficial for curriculum designers to integrate the critical use of media sources as a tool to promote scientific literacy in the biology classroom (Jarman & McClune, 2007; MacKenzie, 2007). This is admittedly not a new concept to the community of educators, many of whom already address the intersection of science and society by integrating popular media into their lesson plans (Guill, 2006). In his discussion of the primary goals of scientific literacy, DeBoer (2000) argues that the ability to understand and negotiate science issues presented by the media is a critical skill for students' successful matriculation into society. Teaching through the use of popular media can be difficult for many teachers because science issues presented may often carry implicit or subtle cultural, moral, and/or religious undertones. When asked about their methods regarding teaching such controversial science topics, many teachers indicate a preference for focusing on facts, rationality, balanced views, and teacher neutrality (Oulton et al., 2004). This only reinforces student perceptions that science should be all about "facts. …}, number={6}, journal={American Biology Teacher}, author={Gardner, G. E. and Jones, M. G. and Ferzli, M.}, year={2009}, pages={332–335} }