Using online simulations to teach biochemistry laboratory content during COVID‐19

Abstract

At the University of South Australia (UniSA), Biochemistry is a second year undergraduate course. The student cohort is diverse, with students enrolled in courses with a laboratory focus, such as Laboratory Medicine, Medical Science, Nutrition and Food Science and Pharmaceutical Science. The course is taught in a traditional manner, with weekly lectures, fortnightly tutorials and three practical sessions. In response to the growing numbers of COVID‐19 cases, in mid‐March the University leadership moved to cease face‐to‐face teaching. By this time, 58 of 96 students had completed the first two (of three) face‐to‐face laboratory practicals. In response to this decision, teaching of all practical based content was moved online for all students. The first question was, how do we teach practical content online? And secondly, how do we teach hands‐on skills? The first question was addressed using a suite of online simulations, progressively developed since 2013. Simulations are widely used and shown to be useful as teaching aids in STEM. A total of five simulations were introduced each covering key aspects of laboratory practice, including fundamental mathematical skills, reading, and setting a pipette, basic Biochemistry assays, protein quantification, and enzyme kinetics. The second issue of teaching hands on skills was addressed once restrictions were eased. Students were invited to attend the laboratory to learn the kinesthetic skills with instructor guidance. Both approaches used proved to be highly effective and can be readily adapted not only to teaching Biochemistry, but any aspect of science education.

At the University of South Australia (UniSA), Biochemistry is a second year undergraduate course. The student cohort is diverse, with students enrolled in courses with a laboratory focus, such as Laboratory Medicine, Medical Science, Nutrition and Food Science and Pharmaceutical Science. The course is taught in a traditional manner, with weekly lectures, fortnightly tutorials and three practical sessions. In response to the growing numbers of COVID‐19 cases, in mid‐March the University leadership moved to cease face‐to‐face teaching. By this time, 58 of 96 students had completed the first two (of three) face‐to‐face laboratory practicals. In response to this decision, teaching of all practical based content was moved online for all students. The first question was, how do we teach practical content online? And secondly, how do we teach hands‐on skills? The first question was addressed using a suite of online simulations, progressively developed since 2013. Simulations are widely used and shown to be useful as teaching aids in STEM. ¹ A total of five simulations were introduced each covering key aspects of laboratory practice, including fundamental mathematical skills, reading and setting a pipette, basic Biochemistry assays, protein quantification and enzyme kinetics. The second issue of teaching hands on skills was addressed once restrictions were eased. Students were invited to attend the laboratory to learn the kinesthetic skills with instructor guidance. Both approaches used proved to be highly effective and can be readily adapted not only to teaching Biochemistry, but any aspect of science education.

The first simulation developed in 2014 for teaching Biochemistry covered enzyme kinetics. Since its introduction, no student who has used the simulation has failed the written practical report. ² Thus, there existed a robust evidence‐base demonstrating that a simulation was educationally effective in teaching Biochemistry. Student feedback also showed that the simulation was valued as a learning resource: “The sim was great, it's a new way to learn compared to what I am used to” (Student comment). To deliver the remaining practicals, students used the simulations to complete the practical report sheets which had been populated with experimental data. These were then submitted and marked independently by two teaching staff.

By late April, teaching restrictions were relaxed so there was an opportunity to teach hands‐on skills. By this stage, all students had completed the online practicals, and their reports had been assessed. Practicals were repeated so students could learn hands‐on skills that could not be taught using the simulations alone. Student feedback was highly encouraging with 12 students indicating they would attend. Overall, the two‐staged approach worked very well, with all students completing the practicals. The background information provided in each simulation proved valuable since some of the content had not yet been taught in lectures (e.g., enzyme kinetics). When the scores for the practical one report were compared, there was no significant difference between students taught face‐to‐face (7 ± 1, mean ± SD, n = 55) compared to those that only used the simulation (7.3 ± 0.84, n = 28). For practical two, again no significant differences were noted (7 ± 1 and 7.1 ± 0.92), respectively. The use of simulations as an alternative to traditional teaching has broad applicability, with the simulations being used by academics from the University of Adelaide, University of Otago and University of Genoa. Student feedback from the hands‐on session was highly positive, with students pleased to be offered a chance to learn important practical skills.

In conclusion, the experience at UniSA has demonstrated that online simulations can be effectively used to teach Biochemistry laboratory concepts when face‐to‐face teaching is not possible. While online learning is becoming more widespread, we should not forget that students still value the provision of hands‐on learning.

Costabile M. Using online simulations to teach biochemistry laboratory content during COVID‐19. Biochem Mol Biol Educ. 2020;48:509–510. 10.1002/bmb.21427